GAUHATI HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON PARASH KUMAR BHATTACHARJEE V/S THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY IRRIGATION AND 6 ORS

GUWAHATI, India, May 25 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on April 24:

1. Heard Mr. P. K. Bhattacharjee, the Petitioner-in-Person. I have also heard Mr. B. Gogoi, the learned Additional Advocate General as well as the Standing Counsel of the Finance Department; Mr. U. Upadhyay, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Irrigation Department and Mr. D. Gogoi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Private Respondent.

2. The three writ petitions are taken up together for disposal by this common judgment and order. The writ petition, i.e. WP(C) No.4185/2023 was filed by the Petitioner seeking a direction upon the Respondent No.5, i.e. the Superintending Engineer, Jorhat (Irrigation) to stop the tender work including allotment work and further sought for, in the interim, to stop the entire process including allotment if made till the disposal of the writ petition.

3. The material facts on the basis of which the said writ petition was filed is that the Respondent No.5, i.e. the Superintending Engineer, Jorhat (Irrigation) had invited an Online Bid vide the Notice Inviting Tender dated 15.06.2023 for a work "MDTWS (5 Points) at Rangamati Mouza under RIDF-XXVIII NABARD for the year 2022-23 amounting to Rs.1,48,50,098/- (approx.) under Bokakhat Khumtai Division (Irrigation), Bokakhat". The last date for submission of the Bid was on 13.07.2023 at 2:00 PM.

4. The Notice Inviting Tender included various terms and conditions in the various sections of the said Notice Inviting Tender. The "Instruction to the Bidders" which is Section-1 to the said Notice Inviting Tender stipulated the eligibility of the bidders, the qualification of the bidders and what the bidders should demonstrate to qualify for the contract.

5. It is the case of the Petitioner in writ petition, i.e. WP(C) No.4185/2023 that the Respondent No.5, i.e. the Superintending Engineer, Jorhat (Irrigation) had hurriedly allotted the work to the single bidder who participated in the said bid amounting to Rs.1,48,50,098/-.

6. The grievance of the Petitioner herein is that when the Bid was only submitted by single participation, the authorities concerned ought to have cancelled the said tender process and should have refloated the tender. It is under such circumstances, the said writ petition was filed.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=tuqye3PhFs%2BBDn75ghiOpIDKkAlGErJ1jJsjzUkAJ5%2FpNXtIe3tnTX%2FqGJdGy36E&caseno=WP(C)/6431/2023&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010247362023&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.