Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4744 (UTT)

ESPAN INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED v. THE UNION OF INDIA

WPMB/27/2026 · 2026-01-09

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Subhash Upadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:507-DB arNo Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 09.01.2026 WPMB No.27 of 2026 Hon ’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J. Hon ’ble Su bh ash Upadh yay , J. ( Per : Hon ’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.) Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the Union of India/ respondent no.1. 3. Ms. Rajni Supyal, learned Brief Holder for State of Uttarakhand/respondent nos.2 to 5. 4. Petitioner has challenged communication issued by Chief Engineer, Level-1, Uttarakhand Public Works Department on 18.01.2025. 5. By the said communication, petitioner was informed that his request for renewal of registration as contractor cannot be considered as he has been blacklisted by Department and order of blacklisting is under challenge in a writ petition filed by petitioner before this Court. 6. Learned counsel for petitioner has relied upon an interim order passed by Co-ordinate Bench in WPMB No.480 of 2024. In the said writ petition, petitioner has challenged order of blacklisting. 7. In that writ petition, an order was passed on 04.10.2024 providing that till next date of listing, petitioner will provisionally participate in tender process. 2026:UHC:507-DB 8. Petitioner submits that Chief Engineer Level-1 was under a duty to renew registration of petitioner in terms of interim order passed on 04.10.2024. The submission made on behalf of petitioner cannot be accepted. Co-ordinate Bench had only permitted petitioner to participate in tender process but there is no direction to competent authority to renew petitioner’s registration. Unless order of blacklisting is set aside by this Court, competent authority cannot grant renewal of registration. Thus, impugned communication cannot be faulted and it reflects correct legal position. 9. Thus, there is no scope for interference. The writ petition fails and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. However, petitioner shall be at liberty to move an application for early hearing in WPMB No.480 of 2024. ( Su bh ash Upadh y ay , J.) ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.) 09.01.2026 SS