Meghalaya High Court Upholds BSCPL's 5-Year Blacklisting For Alleged Corruption In NH-44E Project

The Meghalaya High Court has recently upheld the five-year blacklisting of BSCPL Infrastructure Ltd by the State Public Works Department (Roads) for engaging in corrupt practices during execution of a National Highway project.

The court held that the department was justified in acting on ledger entries showing expenditure on liquor, electronic items, hotel bills and donations for government officials during execution of a National Highway project.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice W. Diengdoh dismissed the company's writ appeal. The Bench affirmed the order dated December 3, 2024 debarring the joint venture from participating in future PWD tenders. It also upheld the Single Judge's judgment dated December 17, 2025 dismissing the writ petition.

“We find that no interference is warranted either in the order dated 3rd December, 2024, blacklisting the appellant-JV or in the order impugned dated 17th December, 2025, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP (C) No.24 of 2025,” the court observed.

The dispute arose from a February 21, 2011 contract for two-laning of the Shillong–Nongstoin section of NH-44E and the Nongstoin–Rongjeng–Tura Road in Meghalaya. The project was initially valued at Rs. 1303.83 crore. It was later revised to Rs. 2406.46 crore.

The project was to be completed by March 7, 2014. However, it was finished on December 15, 2017. A completion certificate was issued on March 13, 2018.

In 2019, during arbitration proceedings, the joint venture filed its statement of claim along with ledger accounts under a “business promotion account” head. The entries reflected expenditure on whisky bottles, mobile phones, laptops, watches, hotel expenses, sweets and donations allegedly made for officials of the Public Works Department and other authorities.

On September 3, 2024, the department lodged a complaint alleging corrupt practices based on those ledger entries. An FIR was registered on September 10, 2024. A show cause notice was issued on September 16, 2024.

After considering the joint venture's reply, the department passed the blacklisting order on December 3, 2024.

Rejecting the challenge, the High Court held that the show cause notice was not vague. It found that the notice contained specific particulars drawn from the appellant's own ledger entries.

“We find that the show cause notice details the particulars, including setting out the entries in the ledger account showing payments made to the officials, and as such, the said show cause notice cannot be quashed and set aside on the ground of vagueness and being devoid of particulars,” the bench said.

The court rejected the argument of delay and found no mala fides. It held that the State was empowered under the contract and in its inherent authority to debar entities engaged in corrupt practices.

The writ appeal was accordingly dismissed.