Facts
The petitioner challenged the Engineer-in-Chief’s order dated 29 August 2025 blacklisting it for two years under Rule 11 of the Bihar Contractor Registration Rules, 2007, and the Secretary’s appellate order dated 5 December 2025 affirming that decision.
Source reference: p. 2The action followed the Technical Bid Evaluation Committee’s finding that an experience certificate submitted with the petitioner’s bid was fake or forged, as reported by the concerned Works Division, Simdega.
Source reference: p. 3; p. 4The respondents stated that the petitioner had been given an opportunity to show cause but did not respond.
Source reference: p. 3Issues
Two-year blacklisting for submitting forged tender documents is not disproportionate.
Source reference: no citationLaw Applied
Rule 11 of the Bihar Contractor Registration Rules, 2007
Source reference: p. 2Reasoning
Two-year blacklisting for submitting forged tender documents is not disproportionate.
Source reference: no citationHolding
Two-year blacklisting for submitting forged tender documents is not disproportionate.
Original Court PDF
Bapu Dham ConstructionvsThe State of Bihar
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
![HRA parity claims must be assessed against similarly situated employees, with reasoned orders where parity is denied.. Shaphaba Thokchom vs DY. COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA. CAT - ['Guwahati']. LawLens](/stories/thumbnails/hra-parity-claims-must-be-assessed-against-similarly-situated-employees-with-reasoned-orde-a9c45995b0704be18e4bcf7b91c8e507.webp)
![Article 311(2)(c) dismissal is valid where relevant material shows an inquiry would endanger security sources.. Mohd Rafi vs GENERAL ADMINITRATIVE DEPARTMENT. CAT - ['Jammu']. LawLens](/stories/thumbnails/article-311-2-c-dismissal-is-valid-where-relevant-material-shows-an-inquiry-would-endanger-58dabaa9372a4b41bd304e91e9ebe890.webp)