Disposed

Rofiqul Islam v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC14 Dec 2021WP(C)/4904/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court directed respondent authorities in the Transport Department to conclude the tender process for a public ferry service within one month after receiving an expert committee report, ensuring the bidding starts/ends transparently without sitting as an appellate court.

What did the court decide?

Direction to complete the tender process for the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara public ferry service within one month of receiving this certified copy.

Rofiqul Islam Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors. — Public Procurement and Tenders | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010136792021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/4904/2021

¶5

ROFIQUL ISLAM

¶6

S/O KITAB ALI, R/O VILL. TUPAMARI, P.O. TUPAMARI BAZAR, PS. NAGARBERA, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN 781127

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, TRANSPORT DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI 06

¶9

2:THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM TRANSPORT DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI 06

¶10

3:THE DIRECTOR OF INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPTT. ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI 07

¶11

4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP AMINGAON DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM PIN 781031 5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DIVISION ULUBARI GUWAHATI 0

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶15

ORDER

¶16

14.12.2021

¶17

Heard Mr. M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. M.D. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Transport Department for the respondent nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5; and Mr. N. Goswami, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent no. 4.

¶18

The respondent no. 3, by a tender notice dated 17.08.2020, invited sealed tenders for settlement of a number of public ferry services under the Inland Water Transport Division, Guwahati for the Financial Year : 2020-2022. One of such public ferry which was sought to be settled by the said tender notice was Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara public ferry service. In response to the said tender notice, the petitioner submitted his tender in respect of the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-RangeswariPijupara public ferry service.

¶19

The case of the petitioner projected in this writ petition, in brief, is that the petitioner submitted his tender along with all the requisite details/documents in terms of the tender notice. He tendered a bid value of Rs. 5,00,000/-. A total of 4 [four] nos. of bidders participated in the competitive bidding process so initiated, for the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara public ferry service. Amongst the 4 [four] bidders, the bid value of the petitioner was the 2^nd highest. The 1^st highest bidder had withdrawn his bid in the meantime and the bids of the 3^rd highest bidder and the 4^th highest bidder were found defective. As a result, the petitioner had emerged as the only valid bidder. In spite of him emerging as the only valid bidder for the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara public ferry service, the respondent authorities in the Transport Department have not settled the said public ferry service in favour of the petitioner.

¶20

3.1 Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court by this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking inter alia a direction to the respondent authorities to finalize the process of settlement of the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara public ferry service.

¶21

Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the above position.

¶22

Ms. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Transport Department has submitted that an affidavit-inopposition has been filed where the stand of the respondent authorities in the Transport Department has been clarified. Ms. Bora has not disputed the position that the 4 [four] nos. of bidders submitted tenders

¶23

Page No.# 3/4

¶24

in respect of the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara public ferry service in response to the tender notice dated 17.08.2020. After the 1^st highest bidder had withdrawn his tender, the bids of the 3^rd highest bidder and the 4^th highest bidder were found defective due to non-deposit of the earnest money deposit. As a result, the petitioner had emerged as the only valid bidder for the said public ferry service. Ms. Bora has further submitted that the Transport Department was, in the meantime, informed by the respondent no. 4 that the local people of the area had constructed a temporary wooden bridge over Jaljali river which was in the route of the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara public ferry service.

¶25

in the said affidavit-in-opposition, it is further averred that the respondent no. 4 vide his order bearing no. KMJ.31/2021/14 dated 10.08.2021 had constituted an expert committee to prepare a detailed report as regards the wooden bridge over Jaljali river. It is the stand of the respondent authorities in the Transport Department in their affidavit-in-opposition that after the submission of the detailed report by the Expert Committee so constituted by the respondent no. 4, the tender committee of the Directorate of Inland Water Transport, Assam would take a decision in respect of the settlement process of the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara public ferry service.

¶26

The Court on 09.11.2021 had directed the learned State Counsel to apprise about the status of submission of the detailed report by the expert committee constituted by the respondent no. 4 vide order bearing no. KMJ.31/2021/14 dated 10.08.2021.

¶27

Mr. Goswami, learned Junior Government Advocate has submitted, on instruction, that the expert committee, comprising of 7 [seven] nos. of members, constituted by the respondent no. 4 vide the order dated 10.08.2021 has already submitted its report to the respondent no. 4 on 28.10.2021. A copy of the said expert committee report has also been forwarded to him.

¶28

As a competitive bidding process was initiated vide the tender notice dated 07.08.2020 for settlement of a number of public ferry services including the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara ferry service and the process of settlement in respect of the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara has not been brought to its logical conclusion till date, it is incumbent on the part of the tender committee and the settling authority to bring the said process to its logical conclusion. The stand of the respondent authorities in the Transport Department in the affidavit-in-opposition, as has been noticed above, is that the tender committee of the Directorate of Inland Water Transport, Assam would take a

¶29

Page No.# 4/4

¶30

decision in respect of the matter of settlement of the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara ferry service after receipt of the expert committee report. Since the expert committee has already submitted its report on 28.10.2021, there appears to be no other impediment for the respondent authorities in the Transport Department to bring the competitive bidding process initiated by the tender notice dated 07.08.2020 for the settlement of the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara public ferry service to a logical conclusion.

¶31

While exercising the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court does not sit as appellate court over a decision of the Government but merely reviews the manner the decision was made. A bidder participating in a tender process has no other right except the right to equality and fair treatment in the matter of evaluation of the tender offered by him in response to a notice inviting tender in a transparent manner. At the same time, the tender inviting authority has the right to refuse the highest tender or any other tender, as the case may be, and may take a decision to invite a fresh tender, provided such action is bonafide and in public interest on the touchstone of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

¶32

11. In view of the above fact situation obtaining in the case, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities in the Transport Department to bring the tender process initiated by the tender notice dated 07.08.2020 for the settlement of the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara public ferry service to a logical conclusion within a period of 1 [one] month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order from the petitioner at the office of the respondent no. 3. It is further made clear that this Court has not made any observation as regards the merits of the claim of the petitioner with regard to the matter of settlement of the Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara public ferry service and the respondent authorities are at liberty to take the decision on the matter of settlement of Daukuchi-Bhakradia-Rangeswari-Pijupara public ferry service in accordance with the extant rules and the procedure.

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

Comparing Assistant

Rofiqul Islam v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rofiqul Islam v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Hrd Commercial and Industrial Security Force Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Monowar Hussain and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Arun Mochahary @ Mochahari Vs the State of Assam

M/S. Dibru Part-I Meen Samabay Samiti Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Bolindra Deori and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Jeet Saikia Vs the State of Assam