Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.32 seconds)
Nisha Pandey vs Union Of India on 4 May, 2026 cites

Raghunath Thakur vs State Of Bihar & Ors on 8 November, 1988

In Raghunath Thakur v. State of Bihar, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that even in absence of statutory requirement, principles of natural justice mandate prior notice before blacklisting. In Blue Dreamz Advertising Pvt. Ltd., it was held that blacklisting must be reasonable and necessary in public interest. In Techno Prints [2025 INSC 236], it was held that blacklisting is a drastic measure and cannot be imposed for mere breach of contract without strong and independent grounds.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 254 - S Mukharji - Full Document

M/S Techno Prints vs Chhattisgarh Textbook Corporation on 17 May, 2023

1.7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Techno Prints v. Chattisgarh Textbook Corporation 4 has relied upon Blue Dreamz and Erusian Equipment to hold that "30.... Therefore, the Authority is expected to be very careful before issuing a show cause notice. It is expected to understand the facts well and try to ascertain what sort of violation is said to have been 3 [2024 INSC 589] 4 [2025 INSC 236] 7 committed by the contractor. As noted above, there is always an inherent power in the Authority to blacklist a contractor. But possessing su inherent power and exercising such power are two different situations anti connotations. There may be a power but there should be reasonable ground to exercise such power.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1