M/s Sat Chikitsa Prasarak Mandal vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12196 of 2026
CNR No. BRHC010745202026
======================================================
M/s Sat Chikitsa Prasarak Mandal Yavatmal, a society having its office at Shri
Satya Sai Vidya Nagri, Waghapur Road, Yavatmal, Maharashtra-445001,
through its Secretary/Authorized Signatory, Shri Prasad Prakash Nandurkar,
Male, Aged about 42 Years, S/o Prakash Bhaskar Nandukar, R/o Bapal
Chowk, Tilakwadi, Yavatmal, Maharashtra-445001
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Rural Development
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Chief Executive Officer, Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society
(JEEVIKA), State Rural Livelihoods Mission, Bihar, 3rd Floor, Vidyut
Bhawan-II, Bailey Road, Patna-800021.
3. The State Project Manager (Jobs), Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion
Society (JEEVIKA), State Rural Livelihoods Mission, Bihar, 3rd Floor,
Vidyut Bhawan-11, Bailey Road, Patna-800021.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrigank Mauli, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Venkatesh Kirti, Advocate
Mr. Sanket, Advocate
Mr. Navin Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr. Tejas Vatsa, Advocate
For the State : Mr. S. D. Sanjay, Advocate General
Mr. Maurya Vijay Chandra, AAG-2
Mr. Rahul Kumar, AC to AG
For the Resp. Nos.2 & 3 : Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Pushkar Bharadwaj, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 03-11-2026
This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the
following prayers :-
“a. For issuance of an appropriate
writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions,

Patna High Court CWJC No.12196 of 2026 dt.03-11-2026
2/11
more particularly in the nature of Certiorari,
for quashing the Office Order contained in
Letter No. BRLPS/Proj-Jobs/ 1193/17/Vol-
II/3737 dated 31.12.2025 issued under the
signature of Respondent No. 2, whereby the
sanctioned DDU-GKY project of the
petitioner has been terminated and the
petitioner has further been blacklisted/
debarred from working with BRLPS
(JEEViKA) for a period of three years, the
same being arbitrary, non-speaking,
disproportionate, contrary to the terms of the
MoU dated 30.12.2017, and violative of the
principles of natural justice.
b. For issuance of an appropriate
writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions,
more particularly in the nature of Mandamus,
commanding the respondents not to give
effect to the blacklisting/debarment part of
the aforesaid impugned order and not to treat
the petitioner as ineligible/disqualified on the
strength thereof.
c. For staying the operation and
implementation of the impugned Office Order
dated 31.12.2025, at least to the extent it
blacklists/debars the petitioner, during the
pendency of the present writ application.
d. For any other order/orders as
may be deemed just and proper in the interest
of justice.”
2. In effect, the petitioner is challenging the Office
order dated 31.12.2025 whereby the respondents have
blacklisted the petitioner for a period of three years. The
impugned order records that the petitioner herein had been
sanctioned a project under Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Grameen

Patna High Court CWJC No.12196 of 2026 dt.03-11-2026
3/11
Kaushalya Yojana (DDU-GKY) for imparting placement linked
training to the Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society
(BRLPS). Government of Bihar vide sanction order dated
20.10.2017 and project commencement order dated 25.01.2018,
and an MoU was signed between the M/s Sat Chikitsa Prasarak
Mandal, Yavatmal (petitioner herein) and the BRLPS on
30.12.2017. As per the MoU, the petitioner through residential
program was to train and place 550 candidates at a total project
cost (excluding welfare cost and PPS) of Rs.3,15,27,536/-. Out
of the said amount 25 percent of the total project cost had
st
already been released by the BRLPS towards the 1 instalment
amounting to Rs.78,81,884/-.
3. The case of the respondents can be seen from the
above impugned order vide Paragraphs 3 to 27, which we
reproduce as under :-
“3. Whereas the agency had
been served with a penalty due to non-
submission of Due Diligence within 60
Days after PCO had been released, vide
letter по. BRLPS/ Proj-Jobs/ 1193/17/5045
dated 27.03.2018.
4. Whereas the agency had been
served with a Show Cause Notice due to
non-compliance of SoP in respect of OJT
verification, vide letter no. BRLPS/Proj-
Jobs/1193/17/2824, dated 06.11.2018.
5. Whereas the agency had been
served with a Notice of imposition of

Patna High Court CWJC No.12196 of 2026 dt.03-11-2026
4/11
Penalty due to non-compliance of SOP in
respect of OJT verification, vide letter no.
BRLPS /Proj-Jobs/ 1193/ 17/ 3214, dated
05.12.2018. The reason of penalty
imposition had been “candidates who took
training in BPSA trade were undergoing
OJT in BPO. Cross domain OJT is not
allowed as OJT is the part of the training.
In addition to it, 08 candidates out of 70
were found on OJT at Rabia Basri
hospital, RPS More, Patna”.
6. Whereas the agency had been
served with a Show Cause Notice against
failure of batch commencement as per
PPWS vide letter no. BRLPS/Proj-
Jobs/1193/17/4096, dated 29.01.2019
(only 140 Candidates were commenced
against 210 as per PPWS).
7. Whereas the SRLM visited the
Training Centre on 13th March 2019 and
found 16 observations.
8. Whereas SRLM visited the
Training Centre on 29th April 2019 again
and found 20 observations, but
compliances awaited till date.
9. Whereas, the SRLM team had
received a letter regarding the intimation
for closure of DDU-GKY Training Centre
of Danapur, Patna on 06th June 2019 and
promised for identification of new Training
centre for commencement of batches.
10. On 14th June, 2019, SRLM
sent a mail regarding gap in
commencement, trained and placed
candidates. The PIA didn't reply against
compliances under status of Project.
11. Whereas the agency had
been served with a Penalty vide BRLPS
letter no.BRLPS/ Proj-jobs/ 1193/ 17/ 3214

Patna High Court CWJC No.12196 of 2026 dt.03-11-2026
5/11
dated 05/12/2018, not taking any
necessary action to restart the Training
center and submission of compliance
report. As the agency failed to comply with
the observations issued in the penalty
order and did not deposit the penalty
amount by the due date. Hence a show
cause notice was issued vide letter no.
BRLPS/Proj-Jobs/1193/17/1193, dated
09.07.2019, citing the reason "why the
project should not be terminated and
recovery process of advance amount given
should not be initiated".
12. Seeing no response from the
end of the agency, the SRLM had sent a
letter for seeking an explanation as "why
the project should not be terminated and
recovery process of the advance amount
given to the PIA should not be
recovered?". The letter was sent vide letter
no. BRLPS/ Proj-Jobs/1193/17/1193, dated
09.07.2019 but no reply has been received
from PIA.
13. Whereas, on 03/10/2019, a
review meeting was held under
chairmanship of CEO, BRLPS. As per the
meeting, PIA was directed to start the
training center immediately otherwise
process for project closure will be initiated
by SRLM.
14. On 16.12.2019, PIA
submitted DDR and the Training Centre
was visited on 20th Dec 2019 by SRLM
and 29 observations were shared with PIA.
PIA submitted compliance report which
was found unsatisfactory after re-visit of
Training Centre on 8th January 2020.
Thereafter, no response/reply has been
received from the PIA inter until this date.

Patna High Court CWJC No.12196 of 2026 dt.03-11-2026
6/11
15. Оп 10/01/2020, a review
meeting was done by SPM-JOBS.
Accordingly. PIA was directed to start the
two batches in January 2020 and also
shared a plan for 100% capacity
utilization of training centre.
16. On 11/02/2020, an email was
sent to the PIA regarding the progress of
project and informed about non-
compliance of Due Diligence observation
given by SRIM.
17.On 25/06/2020, a letter was
sent to the concerned bank for forfeiture of
Bank Guarantee no-FG 5 dated 30th
November 2017.
18. On 17/07/2020, a letter
received by concerned bank refusing to
make payment against Bank Guarantee.
19. On 17/07/2020, an
intimation letter received by Honourable
Court of principal district Yavatmal
regarding not to discharge and pay the
amount of Bank Guarantee. The order was
further vacated by the same court on 20-
04-2021 as BRLPS approached the same
court.
20. Further, PIA filed a petition
to the Bombay High Court regarding non
discharge of the Bank Guarantee amount.
Again, on dated 30/04/2021, a letter was
sent to the concerned bank for forfeiture of
Bank Guarantee no-FG 5 dated 30th
November 2017.
21. On 30-06-2021, the
Honourable Bombay High court, (Nagpur
Bench) has clearly held that the Bank
Guarantee in question may be encashed
and given the order for enchasing the
Bank Guarantee amount.

Patna High Court CWJC No.12196 of 2026 dt.03-11-2026
7/11
22. On dated 16-07-2021, an
office order issued to PIA regarding
imposition of penalty (Suo-Motu) in the
event of failure to fulfil the obligations
mentioned in the SOP procedures and
guidelines of DDU-GKY and for
submission of required documents.
23. With reference to letter no-
11-54 and 11-11 (mentioned to MSRLM
inadvertently though intended for Bihar
SRLM), sent by PIA, received on 06-12-
2021, and 08-12-2021, respectively,
regarding extension for submission of
project closure documents and permission
to start the training Centre in Yavatmal
district (Out of Bihar). SRLM sent a letter
no-BRLPS/Proj-jobs/1193/17/Vol-2/4792
dated 10-01-2022 for not considering the
opening the training centre out of Bihar
and also informed to submit all the
pending documents (Program &
Financial) by 31st January 2022. PIA has
not submitted the required documents till
date.
24. On dated 17/03/2023, a
letter no-BRLPS/ Proj-Jobs/ 1193/ 17/Vol-
2 /6838 sent to PIA regarding refund of the
advance project amount along with
interest in favour of BRLPS, Patna. BRLPS
has received no response has come from
PIA till date.
25. On dated 13/03/2025, a
letter no-BRLPS/ Proj-Jobs/ 1193/17/ Vol-
2/3726 sent to PIA regarding refund of the
advance project amount with applicable
interest to BRLPS within 03 (three) weeks
of the receipt of the letter. No response has
been received from PIA till Date.
26. On dated 26/05/2025, a

Patna High Court CWJC No.12196 of 2026 dt.03-11-2026
8/11
letter no- BRLPS/Proj-Jobs/1193/17/Vol-
2/566 sent to PIA regarding personal
hearing for refund of the advance project
amount along with applicable interest to
BRLPS and to appear for hearing under
the chairmanship CEO-BRLPS. PIA has
not returned the amount as of now.
27. On dated 19/11/2025, a
personal hearing was held under the
chairmanship of CEO-BRLPS in Virtual
Mode. Accordingly, the minutes of the
meeting was issued vide letter no.
BRLPS/Proj-Jobs/1193/17/Vol-
2/3487,dated-03/12/2025, where in the
PIA was directed by the competent
authority to visit SRLM Bihar office in
person and submit the project closure
(both physical and financial) documents as
per SoP. guidelines and notifications
issued by MoRD, GoI, within 15 days from
the receipt of the minutes of the personal
hearing meeting. No documents have been
sent from PIA till 29/12/2025.
In view of the above, and as per the
provisions contained in MoU/ SOPs/
Notifications/Guidelines of MoRD. it has
been decided that the project of M/s Sat
Chikitsa Prasarak Mandal Yavatmal, Distt.
Yavatmal be terminated immediately and
PIA be blacklisted from working with
BRLPS (JEEViKA) for a period of 3 years
with immediate effect.”
4. Suffice to state that insofar as the plea of the
learned counsel for the petitioner that no show-cause notice was
issued to the petitioner is concerned, letter dated 26.05.2025,

Patna High Court CWJC No.12196 of 2026 dt.03-11-2026
9/11
vide last Paragraph (Page 50) reads as under :-
“You are hereby required to
confirm your presence for the above
mentioned date within 05 days of receipt of
this letter. Failing which recovery of
project advance and applicable interest
through certificate case under “Public
Demand Recovery Act” will be initiated.
Other actions including blacklisting will
also be initiated in the light of MOU,
Guidelines, SOP and Notifications of DDU
GKY, Ministry of Rural Development,
Govt. of India.
Looking forward to close the
project on priority as it involves public
fund and PIA owes a responsibility to settle
the account on priority.”
5. The above is a show-cause notice issued to the
petitioner, including on the aspect of blacklisting.
6. The petitioner had appeared before the CEO, to
represent its case, on 06.06.2025. It is pursuant thereto that the
impugned order has been passed.
7. The submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner is primarily by drawing our attention to the page-50 of
the notice to contend that the requirement of hearing would not
substitute a show-cause notice.
8. We are unable to accept this plea of the learned
counsel for the petitioner in view of the facts noted by us in the
aforesaid paragraphs. It is a case where the respondent-BRLPS

Patna High Court CWJC No.12196 of 2026 dt.03-11-2026
10/11
has been writing to the petitioner from time to time notifying the
non-performance of obligations by the petitioner in terms of the
MoU as executed. In fact, on some occasions notices of penalty
were also issued to the petitioner.
9. We agree with the submission of Mr. Abhinav
Shrivastava, learned Senior counsel for the respondents that the
notices relate back to the year 2018, hence in that sense it is
immediately after the execution of the MoU, the petitioner
started defaulting in performing its obligations under the MoU.
Vide communication dated 26.05.2025, the respondent-BRLPS
has expressed itself its intention to take action for blacklisting
the petitioner in the light of the MoU, Guidelines, SOP and
notifications of DDU-GKY, Ministry of Rural Development,
Government of India. Hence the plea that no show-cause was
issued is liable to be rejected.
10. One of the pleas of the learned counsel for the
petitioner is also on the proportionality of the impugned action
inasmuch as the petitioner has been blacklisted for a period of
three years, which is impermissible.
11. We are unable to accept the said plea of the
learned counsel for the petitioner more particularly in view of
the facts noted by us in the aforesaid paragraphs. It is not a case

Patna High Court CWJC No.12196 of 2026 dt.03-11-2026
11/11
that blacklisting of three years shocks the conscience of the
Court. Even the scope of judicial review at least in the facts of
this case cannot be exercised, more particularly in exercise of
our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
12. We are of the view that the present petition lacks
merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. We order
accordingly.
13. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.


(V. Kameswar Rao, CJ)
(Partha Sarthy, J)
avinash/Bibhash
AFR/NAFR
N/A
CAV DATE
06.11.2026
Uploading Date
Transmission Date