2026:JHHC:19157-DB -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 6596 of 2024 M/s Annapurna Utilities Services Private Limited through its Director Anil Kumar Singh aged about 56 years Son of Late Ram Suhag Singh, office at H.No.38/C2, Near Divyan Lake Ganpati Vihar, Morabadi, P.O. and P.S. Bariyatu, District Ranchi. … Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India 2. Divisional Railway Manager, South Eastern Railways, Chakardharpur, P.O. and. P.S. Chakardharpur, District West Singhbhum. (3) Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, South Eastern Railways, Chakardharpur, P.O. and. P.S. Chakardharpur, District West Singhbhum. (4) Divisional Manager, South Eastern Railways, Chakardharpur, P.O. and. P.S. Chakardharpur, District West Singhbhum (5) Assistant Commercial Manager, South Eastern Railways, Chakardharpur, P.O. and. P.S. Chakardharpur, District West Singhbhum ... Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate Mr. Malay Chakrapani, Advocate Mr. Amar Deep, Advocate Mr. Adarsh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Tannu Shree, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Awanish Ranjan Mishra, C.G.C. --------- 07/Dated: 01.07.2026 1. Heard Mr Atanu Banerjee who appears with Mr Malay Chakrapani for the petitioner and Mr Awanish Ranjan Mishra, learned C.G.C. for the respondents. 2. Rule. The rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Mr Banerjee, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that the petitioner now restricts its challenge to the portion of the impugned communication dated 28.11.2024 by which the petitioner has been debarred from participation in the 2026:JHHC:19157-DB -2- bid for executing any works being tendered by Chakradharpur Division for a period of two years from the date of issue of this communication. 4. Mr Banerjee submits that the petitioner was served with no show cause notice informing it of such a drastic consequence and without issue of such show cause notice, the penalty of debarment for two years has been imposed upon the petitioner. Mr Banerjee further submits that such imposition violates the principles of natural justice and fair play and is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gorkha Security Services v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi) and Ors., (2014) 9 SCC 105, UMC Technologies (P) Ltd. v. Food Corpn. of India & Anr., (2021) 2 SCC 551 and Vetindia Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., (2021) 1 SCC 804. 5. Mr Awanish Ranjan Mishra, the learned C.G.C. for the respondents, submits that full opportunity was given to the petitioner to provide the performance guarantee. He submits that even an extension was granted to the petitioner, but the petitioner defaulted. Considering this position and the severe inconvenience caused to the respondents, the petitioner was debarred for two years from any works tendered by Chakradharpur Division. He submitted that there was no breach of natural justice and the action of the respondents has been just and fair. 6. The rival contentions now fall for our determination. 2026:JHHC:19157-DB -3- 7. In this case, the petitioner has restricted its challenge to the direction in the concluding paragraph of the impugned communication dated 28.11.2024, which reads as follows: - “In addition, your participation as well as participation of every member/partner in any manner as an individual or a partnership firm is hereby debarred from participation in the bid for executing any work being tendered by the Chakradharpur Division for a period of two years from the date of issue of this letter.” 8. On 30.10.2024, respondents did issue a notice to the petitioner for furnishing a performance guarantee. The notice indicates that even earlier the respondents had indulged the petitioner by extending the time limit for furnishing the performance guarantee. In the concluding sentence of this notice, it was stated as follows: - “You shall be debarred from participating in the re- tender for this work”. 9. The petitioner has no grievance about its being debarred from participating in the re-tender for the work in question for which the petitioner defaulted in furnishing the performance guarantee. The petitioner’s grievance is that the petitioner has been debarred from participation in the bid for executing “any work being tendered by the Chakradharpur Division for a period of two years from the date of issue of this letter”. 10. The impugned portion of the communication dated 28.11.2024 debars or blacklist the petitioner for two years in respect of any works being tendered by the Chakradharpur Division for a period of two years. To sustain such a drastic action, 2026:JHHC:19157-DB -4- the same should have been preceded by a specific show-cause notice to comply with the requirements contemplated by the principles of natural justice and fair play. 11. Notice dated 30.10.2024 nowhere hinted at any blacklisting or debarment in respect of all other works being tendered by the Chakradharpur Division for a period of two years. Thus, there was no notice, much less a specific notice, regarding the proposed blacklisting or debarment of the petitioner from executing any works tendered by the Chakradharpur Division for a period of two years. The impugned action would, therefore, violate the principles of natural justice and fair play. 12. In Gorkha Security Services (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court in paragraphs 21 and 22 has made the following observations: - “Contents of the show-cause notice 21. The central issue, however, pertains to the requirement of stating the action which is proposed to be taken. The fundamental purpose behind the serving of show-cause notice is to make the noticee understand the precise case set up against him which he has to meet. This would require the statement of imputations detailing out the alleged breaches and defaults he has committed, so that he gets an opportunity to rebut the same. Another requirement, according to us, is the nature of action which is proposed to be taken for such a breach. That should also be stated so that the noticee is able to point out that proposed action is not warranted in the given case, even if the defaults/breaches complained of are not satisfactorily explained. When it comes to blacklisting, this requirement becomes all the more 2026:JHHC:19157-DB -5- imperative, having regard to the fact that it is harshest possible action. 22. The High Court has simply stated that the purpose of show-cause notice is primarily to enable the noticee to meet the grounds on which the action is proposed against him. No doubt, the High Court is justified to this agent, However, it is equally important to mention as to what would be the consequence if the noticee does not satisfactorily meet the grounds on which an action is proposed. To put it otherwise, we are of the opinion that in order fulfil the requirements of principles of natural justice, a show-cause notice should meet the following two requirements viz: (i) The material/grounds to be stated which according to the department necessitates an action; (ii) Particular penalty/action which is proposed to be taken. It is this second requirement which the High Court has failed to omit. We may hasten to add that even if it is not specifically mentioned in the show-cause notice but it can clearly and safely be discerned from the reading thereof, that would be sufficient to meet this requirement.” 13. The above decision holds that in order to fulfill the requirements of principles of natural justice, a show cause notice that precedes the action of blacklisting/debarment should state the materials/grounds which according to the department necessitates such action; and the particular penalty/action which is proposed to be taken should also be set out in the show cause notice or at least, if it is not specifically mentioned in the show cause notice, it should be clearly and safely discernible from the reading thereof, that would be sufficient to meet these requirements. 2026:JHHC:19157-DB -6- 14. In the present case, the second requirement referred to by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gorkha Security Services (supra) has not been complied with. The notice dated 30.10.2024 referred to debarment for the same work or the re- tender of the same work. There was no show-cause notice regarding debarment from participating in bids to execute any work tendered by the Chakradharpur Division for a period of two years. The impugned action, therefore, is contrary to the law laid down in Gorkha Security Services (supra). 15. Similarly, in UMC Technologies (P) Ltd (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has made the following observations in paragraph 13 and 14: - “13. At the outset, it must be noted that it is the first principle of civilised jurisprudence that a person against whom any action is sought to be taken or whose right or interests are being affected should be given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself. The basic principle of natural justice is that before adjudication starts, the authority concerned should give to the affected party a notice of the case against him so that he can defend himself. Such notice should be adequate and the grounds necessitating action and the penalty/action proposed should be mentioned specifically and unambiguously. An order travelling beyond the bounds of notice is impermissible and without jurisdiction to that extent. This Court in Nasir Ahmad v. Assistant Custodian General, Evacuee Property, Lucknow and Anr., has held that it is essential for the notice to specify the particular grounds on the basis of which an action is proposed to be taken so as to enable the noticee to answer the case against him. If these conditions are not 2026:JHHC:19157-DB -7- satisfied, the person cannot be said to have been granted any reasonable opportunity of being heard. 14. Specifically, in the context of blacklisting of a person or an entity by the state or a state corporation, the requirement of a valid, particularized and unambiguous show cause notice is particularly crucial due to the severe consequences of blacklisting and the stigmatization that accrues to the person/entity being blacklisted. Here, it may be gainful to describe the concept of blacklisting and the graveness of the consequences occasioned by it. Blacklisting has the effect of denying a person or an entity the privileged opportunity of entering into government contracts. This privilege arises because it is the State who is the counterparty in government contracts and as such, every eligible person is to be afforded an equal opportunity to participate in such contracts, without arbitrariness and discrimination. Not only does blacklisting takes away this privilege, it also tarnishes the blacklisted person’s reputation and brings the person’s character into question. Blacklisting also has long-lasting civil consequences for the future business prospects of the blacklisted person.” 16. The impugned action in the present case, for reasons discussed above, is also in breach of the law reiterated in UMC Technologies (P) Ltd (supra). This is because the notice dated 30.10.2024 can hardly be regarded as a particularized and unambiguous show cause notice given the severe consequences of black-listing and stigmatization that accrues to a person/entity being blacklisted. 17. The principle laid down in Gorkha Security Services (supra) was once again reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vetindia Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (supra). 2026:JHHC:19157-DB -8- 18. For the above reasons, we quash and set aside the impugned portion of the communication dated 28.11.2024 to the extent it debars the petitioner from participation in the bid for executing any work being tendered by the Chakradharpur Division for a period of two years from the date of issue of the said communication. 19. The rule in this petition is made absolute to the above extent. There shall be no order for cost. 20. This petition is disposed of in the above terms, and any pending I.As. are also disposed of. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) 01.07.2026 N.A.F.R. APK/AKT Uploaded on 03.07.2026