Disposed

M/S Puberun v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC4 Dec 2023WP(C)/6911/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the petitioner to submit a detailed representation regarding alleged tender discrepancies to the Director of Horticulture and Food Processing within seven days. Final settlement under the Notice Inviting Tender was stayed pending disposal of the representation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to submit detailed representation to Director of Horticulture and Food Processing within 07.12.2023; interim stay on final settlement of tender pending consideration.

M/S Puberun Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Public Procurement and Tenders | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010268262023

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/6911/2023

¶5

M/S PUBERUN

¶6

A PROPRIETORIAL FIRM REPRESENTED BY THE SOLE PROPRIETOR SHRI PURNA MAHANTA HAVING ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS AT DISHA ENCLAVE, R.G. BARUAH ROAD, DIST. KAMRUP(M), ASSAM, PIN- 781005.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

¶9

2:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM AND AGRICULTURE PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER ASSAM AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.

¶10

3:THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE

¶11

ASSAM AND CHAIRMAN DEPARTMENTAL BID COMMITTEE (DBC) KHANAPARA

¶12

GUWAHATI-22.

¶13

4:THE DIRECTOR HORTICULTURE AND FOOD PROCESSING (FP) ASSAM KHANAPARA GHY-22

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S S GOSWAMI

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : SC. AGRICULTURE

¶16

Page No.# 2/4

¶17

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

¶18

ORDER

¶19

04.12.2023

¶20

Heard Shri SS Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri B Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Agriculture Department, Assam.

¶21

2. When this case was taken up on the last occasion i.e. 01.12.2023, the learned Standing Counsel was directed to have the instructions which have been procured today i.e. 04.12.2023.

¶22

3. The matter pertains to a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) issued by the Agriculture Department on 29.07.2023. The said NIT is with regard to supply of 25 numbers of Agro Plastic items for the years 2023-24 and 2024-25.

¶23

4. It is the case of the petitioner that it had participated in the said process by submitting its bid. The grievance of the petitioner is, however, based on the alleged discrepancy on the part of the respondent authorities in dividing the items into two groups and the experience clause for the two groups were in variation.

¶24

5. Shri Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the Assam Public Procurement Rules 2020 and the Standard Bidding Document (Goods) of the Finance Department, Government of Assam to support his case.

¶25

6. Shri Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel of the Department, however, submits that the technical evaluation of the bids has already been conducted in

¶26

Page No.# 3/4

¶27

which the bid of the petitioner was not found to be technically responsive and there is no specific challenge to the said action. Nonetheless, he submits that the petitioner can still raise the grievance before the Director of Horticulture and Food Processing as there is a mechanism for redressal of such grievance. It is further submitted that all the points raised in this petition can be the subject matter of the grievance which may be expressed in a petition that may be submitted before the aforesaid Director.

¶28

7. Shri Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, expresses apprehension that if, in the meantime, the settlement process is finalized, the petitioner would suffer immense prejudice and therefore, prays for certain observations to protect the rights of the petitioner till such consideration.

¶29

8. Having regard to the rival submission made, this Court is of the opinion that instead of entering into the merits of the dispute by this Court, at this stage, it would be prudent to permit the petitioner to submit a detail representation expressing all the grievances before the Director of Horticulture and Food Processing which may be done within 07.12.2023.

¶30

9. To balance the equities, it is, however, directed that till the time stipulated for submission of the representation, no final decision be taken towards settlement pursuant to the NIT in question. The Director of Horticulture and Food Proceeding on receipt of the representation shall consider the same and pass necessary speaking order(s) which may be communicated to the petitioner. Since a tender process is involved, the Director aforesaid may dispose of the representation as early as possible and till such disposal is made, the interim observation would continue to operate.

¶31

Page No.# 4/4

¶32

10. It is needless to say that the petitioner would be at liberty to approach this Court in case any further grievance arises.

¶33

11. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

M/S Puberun v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Puberun v. the State of Assam and 3 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

The Lanka Gurdwara Prabhandak Committee and Anr. Vs Subir Chakraborty and 7 Ors.

M/S. Assent Chemicals Ltd. Vs Khitish Kalita

Dhrubajit Baishya Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Ratna Rani Das and Anr. Vs Dipak Baruah

Tapan Medhi Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Ranjit Kumar Paul Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.