GUWAHATI, India, Aug. 8 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on July 10:

1. Heard Mr A Dhar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr A Chandran, learned Senior Government Advocate, Arunachal Pradesh, appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

2. Petitioner before this Court has challenged the legality and validity of the Letter of Intent (LOI) dated 6th of June, 2025, whereby the private respondent has been awarded the letter of intent in respect of the NIT Package No. III, in which the petitioner has also participated. It is submitted that vide NIT dated 11.04.2025, bids were invited for supply of material under MGNREGA 2025-2026, with an estimated cost of Rs. 3,55,15,701/-. The time of completion of the NIT is 12 months after 31st March, 2026. Petitioner along with private respondent and other bidders submitted their bids for the said tender.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as per the special conditions enclosed with the bid document at Clause-13, it was specified that solvency certificate of nationalized bank not less than 50% of the tender amount is required to be furnished. Further under Clause-15 (v), it was specified that the guidelines of the Arunachal Pradesh District Based Entrepreneurs and Professionals (Incentives, Development and Promotional) Act, 2015, will be strictly followed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under the said guidelines, the petitioner was required to be a registered contractor under the Rules of 2015. However, in the list of valid enlisted/re-validated contractors in respect of Class-II (Civil) category, as on 12.12.2024, the name of the private respondent is not found enlisted therein. The name of the petitioner, however, is listed at Serial No. 84.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although these two conditions are mandatory conditions, the same has not been fulfilled by the private respondent, and yet the respondent authorities have shortlisted the private respondent as the selected bidder and the impugned letter of intent was issued.

6. That apart, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the private respondent claims to be a registered contractor under the Assam Public Works Department. However, as per the notification issued by the Government of Assam dated 20th of July, 2018, Class-II Contractors are eligible for submission of tender with financial limitation up to Rs. 100 lacs.

7. It is submitted that the present NIT is more than Rs. 1 crore and, therefore, on the face of it, the private respondent is not authorized and/or competent to participate in this tender. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that all these specific conditions are violated or not adhered to, while issuing the LOI in favour of the private respondent. The writ petitioner has also been declared to be in the L1 bidder and he satisfies all the requirements as prescribed under the NIT. Therefore, the LOI ought to have been issued to him. That not having been done, the instant writ petition has been filed challenging the LOI, and the award of contract to the private respondent No. 6. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that the impugned LOI be interfered with and set aside and the respondent authorities be directed to issue the LOI to the writ petitioner, and till that time, the matter is decided by the Court, adequate ad-interim protection be granted by the Court.

8. Learned Senior Government Advocate, Arunachal Pradesh, on the other hand, strongly disputes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the work order has already been issued on 12th of June, 2025 and the private respondent has already proceeded with the work.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816x456n96RUpXh%2BMnynh8mTxqMEdI8UwwQ58aAwF4JP35A&caseno=WP(C)/3859/2025&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010149982025&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.