Disposed

Kara Topu and Anr. v. the State of Ap and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC15 Nov 2022WP(C)/414/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging exclusion from tender due to lack of No Objection Certificate was disposed of. Court directed authorities to allow petitioners to participate if NOC is submitted within five days before the bid opening.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to submit NOC within 5 days to participate in the tender process; authorities to thereafter proceed complying with tender provisions.

Kara Topu and Anr. Vs the State of Ap and 5 Ors. — RTI and Transparency | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC040013262022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 414/2022

¶5

1:Kara Topu and Anr.

¶6

S/o Shri Kara Hachi, Permanent Residence of Batt Village, PO R.K Mission, Itanagar, PS Chimpu,District Papum Pare, Arunachal Pradesh,

¶7

2: Giogi Talar S/o Giogi Tado

¶8

Permanent Residence of Batt Village PO R.K. Mission Itanagar PS Chimpu District Papum Pare Arunachal Pradesh

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

1:THE STATE OF AP and 5 Ors.

¶11

Represented by the Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, Department of Public Works Department, Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh.

¶12

2:The Executive Engineer Public Works Department Capital Division Itanagar Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.

¶13

3:The Superintendent of Engineer Public Work Department Capital Division Itanagar Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.

¶14

Page No.# 2/4

¶15

4:The Assistant Engineer Public Works Department Capital Division Itanagar Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.

¶16

5:Taro Tagio S/o Taro Duli ZPM of 11th Batt Ganga Zilla Parishad Panchayat PO and PS Itanagar District Papum Pare Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar. 6:Giogi Sanu W/o Shri Giogi Chupe Village Lorr Putung Gram Panchayat Chairperson of 1 Batt Segment PO R.K Mission PS Itanagar District Papum Pare Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : Taba Topu

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP)

¶19

BEFORE

¶20

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Date : 15.11.2022

¶23

Mr. D. Panging, learned counsel appears for the petitioners and Mr. T. Tagum, learned counsel appears for the respondent Nos. 5 & 6, while Mr. Y.

¶24

Page No.# 3/4

¶25

Riram, learned counsel appears for the official respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

¶26

The petitioners responded to the NIT dated 17.10.2022, which was floated by the Office of the Executive Engineer, PWD, Capital Division-A, Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh for “Re-development of Ganga Lake, Itanagar” at the estimated cost of Rs. 938.60 lakhs. One of the conditions stipulated was that the prospective tenderers should submit “No Objection Certificate” (In short NOC) given by the local governing body of the concerned area i.e., the ZPM/GPC. Since, the petitioners did not have the NOC they could not participate in the tender process. Being aggrieved, they filed this present writ petition before this Court and this Court vide order dated 03.11.2022, passed an interim order to the effect that the tender documents should not be opened till 14.11.2022.

¶27

Today, Mr. Tagum, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 5 & 6 submits that the petitioners have been issued the required NOC by the ZPM as well as the GPC of the area concerned and he has handed over the copy of the same to Mr. Panging, learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶28

In view of such developments, Mr. Panging, learned counsel submits that he may be allowed to participate in the tender process by submitting the NOC to the respondent authorities concerned.

¶29

In view of above, the respondent authorities concerned are directed to allow the petitioners to participate in the tender process and the petitioners shall submit the NOC along with the bid documents before the respondent authorities concerned within 5 days from today. Thereafter, the respondent authorities shall proceed with the matter in accordance with the provisions governing the tender process.

¶30

Page No.# 4/4

¶31

The writ petition accordingly, stands disposed of.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Kara Topu and Anr. v. the State of Ap and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kara Topu and Anr. v. the State of Ap and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hillang Tadh Vs the State of Ap and 3 Ors.

Shahkhah Jomoh and 10 Ors. Vs the State of Ap and 2 Ors.

Tapir Mize and Anr. Vs the State of Ap and 3 Ors.

M/s Tanor Engineer Vs the State of Ap and 2 Ors.

Tytslr Multipurpose Co. operative Society Ltd. Vs the State of Ap and 3 Ors.

Ossumpuri Village Community Land Vs The National Hydro Power Corporation (Nhpc) and 3 Ors.