Collector cannot blacklist manpower service provider without hearing him properly

Mind Mart Vs State Of Odisha & Anr. (Orissa High Court)

he core issue involved herein involving the impugned order involving the Petitioner has been blacklisted from providing manpower in respect of the Jajpur District if suffers on account of natural justice and further if based on justified ground ? Keeping in view the contentions and the objections of the respective Parties, this Court finds, the only foundation available to be a complain of the Data Entry Operators before the District Administration as well as Law and Order Authority alleging non-payment of monthly remuneration in time and excess deduction from their salary towards Service Tax, GST etc. Undisputedly, in spite of issuing of several requests, the Petitioner did not cooperate nor submitted its response. Further foundation available, as recorded by the Collector, to be pendency of an F.I.R./complain against the Petitioner. Looking to the nature of complain contained and as recorded in the A.D.M.’s request to the Petitioner, vide Annexure-A/2, this Court finds, there has been a plain complain on accounts aspect, no submission of Final Report and undisputedly, looking to the stage of complain, no inference could have been drawn against the Petitioner. Thus only foundation in the issuing of impugned order appears to be the complaint at the instance of the Data Entry Operators. Since the outcome was aiming to blacklist the Petitioner, the response of the Petitioner ought to have been involved before blacklisting such a Party. Fact remains, the Petitioner has no reason not to cooperate. For the opinion of this Court even assuming the Collector is in possession of the report from the Tahasildar, there is no material enclosing the copy of the report to the Petitioner asking its response to such report. In any case since the decision for blacklisting of the Petitioner has been taken by the Collector without involvement of the Petitioner and further in view of all the above glaring defects, the final outcome resulting in blacklisting the Petitioner remains completely defective. Even though this Court finds, there have been certain correspondences already made to the Petitioner asking its response, this Court finds, there is unjust decision and the decision involved taken in haste, as there is no harm on the part of the Competent Authority in waiting for response of the Petitioner, besides there is wrong appreciation on the issue of police complaint.

Looking to the nature of punishment imposed on the Petitioner and the manner of disposal, this Court is compelled to interfere with the impugned order and in the process sets aside the order at Annexure-1. Since the complain of the Data Entry Operators requires lawful disposal, let the Collector of the district accepts the response of the Petitioner on its appearance before the Collector on 9^th November, 2022, on which date the Petitioner will be intimated the date of hearing of such proceeding. The Petitioner is also directed to cooperate with the Collector in finalizing the issue. In the meantime, this Court hopes and expects, there will be no exploitation of the Data Entry Operators either in the matter of getting monthly remuneration as well as deduction of Service Tax and G.S.T.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ORISSA HIGH COURT

1. The Writ Petition involves the following prayer :-

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.