Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3177 (UTT)

MS SWASTIK ENTERPRISES v. UTTARAKHAND POWER CORPORATION LIMITED

WPMB/244/2026 · 2026-04-15

Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, Subhash Upadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:2654-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY 15TH APRIL, 2026 WRIT PETITION (M/B) No. 244 OF 2026 M/s Swastik Enterprises …….Petitioner. Versus Uttarakhand Power Corporation Limited and others. …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri Bhuwan Bhatt and Sri Prince Chauhan, learned counsel. Counsel for the respondents : Sri D. Barthwal, learned counsel. JUDGMENT : (Per Sri Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J 1. The petitioner, feeling aggrieved by recommendation of the Executive Engineer to the Superintending Engineer on 12.01.2026 for black-listing the petitioner-firm and the order dated 27.02.2026 passed by the Executive Engineer black-listing the petitioner-firm for two years, has filed the present writ petition. 2. On 09.04.2026, the following order was passed:- “1. Sri Bhuwan Bhatt and Sri Prince Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Sri Dharmendra Barthwal, learned counsel for the respondents. 3. The submission is that the impugned black-listing order has been passed without any notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents prays for time to obtain instructions on the said aspect. 5. Put up as fresh on 15.04.2026.” 3. Sri Dharmendra Barthwal, learned counsel for the respondents, on instructions, concedes that proper show cause notice to black-list the petitioner-firm was not given. Therefore, he 2026:UHC:2654-DB 2 has no objection, in case the impugned order is quashed and liberty is given to the Department to proceed afresh, after giving proper notice. 4. In view of the above, the impugned order of black- listing dated 27.02.2026 is hereby quashed. It is left open to the Department to issue a proper notice to the petitioner-firm and, thereafter, pass a fresh order strictly in accordance with law. 5. The writ petition stands disposed of. 6. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. _____________________ MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J. ___________________ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J. Dt: 15th April, 2026 Rathour PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR Digitally signed by PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=23699ccc2fd40ad81b6fd13323779d9e3aeb1097d17dbb53d481ca bd25946eed, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=1F65499E931DF71CDAF92A40CC6179B8E010331BA6952391 71F906FD5C45C4E8, cn=PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR Date: 2026.04.16 10:55:00 +05'30'