TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (12) TMI 1097
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ition assailing the order dated 12.07.2021 passed by the respondent whereby the contract awarded to the petitioner on 24.03.2021 for providing healthcare, kitchen and dietary services in Shri Dada Dev Matri and Sheeshu Chikitshyalaya has been cancelled and the petitioners have been blacklisted for a period of two years. 4. The facts leading to the present case are that on 06.03.2021, the respondent floated a tender seeking a supplier of healthcare kitchen and dietary services at the Shri Dada Dev Matri Avum Shishu Chikitsalaya, New Delhi, a Hospital providing healthcare services for mothers and children. The petitioner submitted its bid through GeM and quoted a daily amount of Rs. 105/unit per patient. The tender required the petitioner to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r providing false information to the petitioner at the time of bid submission and for failing to submit the requisite Performance Bank Guarantee under the contract. After considering the petitioner's reply dated 01.07.2021 to the show cause notice, the respondent passed the impugned order on 12.07.2021. 6. In the meanwhile, on being issued the show cause notice on 19.06.2021, the petitioner hastened to redeem itself and approached the Appellate Authority of the GST Department to place forth its explanation in respect of its defaults committed by it and seek reactivation of its GST Number. The learned Appellate Authority found in favour of the petitioner and allowed the appeal by directing that its GST registration number be restored w.e.f.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....had been submitted by the petitioner and that the petitioner had not committed any default; the entire issue with the Department had been resolved by making necessary adjustments of previously paid extra amounts towards returns against the dues purportedly owed by the petitioner. He further contends that the entire act of terminating and blacklisting the petitioner after the dispute with the Department had stood resolved, was entirely unjustified and baseless. 8. Mr Bajpai then submits that the respondent, being the State, was required to act in a fair and reasonable manner, yet it decided to terminate its contract with the petitioner and blacklist it, in a move that can only be described as excessive and arbitrary considering that the ent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bvious and crucial aspect of their commercial relationship was the validity and existence of the GST registration number provided by the vendor, the petitioner herein. Therefore, any claim of the petitioner that the GST number was not a primary facet of their transaction is completely erroneous and deserves to be rejected at the outset. He contends that the entire decision to blacklist the petitioner was a consequence of the petitioner indulging in falsehood when transacting with the respondent Hospital, a State, and that the same could not be dealt with any leniently than it was since that would set a terrible precedent for other vendors such as the petitioner. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be dismissed. 10. I have considere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rcumstances. Small proprietorships, such as the petitioner's, are already flailing in this economy and finding it hard to survive and the respondent, being a State, cannot be blind to this reality. Permitting a punitive action of this nature to continue would deal a greater blow to the survival of small businesses such as the petitioner. After all, as the petitioner has rightly contended, at the time when the impugned order was passed, the entire basis for the respondent's grievance with the petitioner - that the GST Department had cancelled its registration - stood resolved under the directions of the learned Appellate Authority. 11. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the respondent ought to re-consider the decision to blacklis....