Disposed
M/s N T Agency v. The State of Ap and 5 Ors.
Gauhati HCIA(C)/157/2024
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
GAHC040011602024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT…
What the court decided
AI extract
GAHC040011602024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC040011602024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : IA(C)/157/2024
M/s N T Agency
registered office at B Sector, Prem Nagar, Naharlagun, Papumpare District, Arunachal Pradesh, represented by its attorney Shri Lokap Pao, Son of Late Mana Pao, resident of Village Kremapao, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh
VERSUS
The State of AP and 5 Ors
represented by the Secretary, RWD cum Chief Executive Officer, ARRDA, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar 2:The Chief Engineer Age: 0 Occupation :
3:The Superintending Engineer Age: 0 Occupation :
4:The Chiarman Age: 0 Occupation :
5:M/s Tenzing Construction Age: 0 Occupation :
6:M/s TNT Enterprsie Age: 0 Occupation
Page No.# 2/5
Advocate for the Petitioner : Eho Menjo
Advocate for the Respondent : Gimi Tarak
Linked Case : WP(C)/344/2024
M/s N T Agency Age: 0 Occupation : Address:registered office at B Sector Prem Nagar Naharlagun Papumpare District Arunachal Pradesh represented by its attorney Shri Lokap Pao Son of Late Mana Pao resident of Village Kremapao East Kameng District Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS The State of AP and 5 Ors Age: 0 Occupation : Address:represented by the Secretary RWD cum Chief Executive Officer ARRDA Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar 2:The Chief Engineer Age: 0 Occupation : Address:PMGSY Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar 3:The Superintendent Engineer Age: 0 Occupation : Address:Rural Work Circle Rupa West Kameng District Arunachal Pradesh
Page No.# 3/5
4:The Chairman Age: 0 Occupation : Address:Tender Evaluation Committee RWC Rupa West Kameng District Arunachal Pradesh 5:M/s Tenzing Construction Age: 0 Occupation : Address:represented by its proprietor Shri Lobsang Tsering Son of Shri Chomu Monpa Dirang Village PO and PS Dirang West Kameng District Arunachal Pradesh 6:M/s TNT Enterprise Age: 0 Occupation : Address:represented by its proprietor Shri Thinley resident of Old Market Tawang PO and PS Tawang District Tawang Arunachal Pradesh -----------Advocate for : Pritam Taffo Advocate for : Gimi Tarak appearing for The State of AP and 5 Ors: Advocate , , , , , appearing for 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, respectively.
Page No.# 4/5
B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE
ORDER
05.09.2024
Heard Mr. P. Taffo, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner. Also heard Mr. G. Tarak, learned Standing Counsel, RWD, for the opposite parties/respondents.
By filing this application, the applicant has sought for amendment of the writ petition being WP(C) No.344/2024. It is submitted that in view of the subsequent developments during the pendency of the WP(C)344/2024, the applicant seeks amendment of the writ petition by incorporating the following paragraph as 19A and 19B, which are quoted as under:-
”19A. That the respondent authority continued to assert that the financial Bid was allegedly opened 20- 08-2024. However, the petitioner couldn't access copy of the same as the respondent authorities didn't upload the same on the website. The impugned financial bid opening dated 20-08-2024 was uploaded only on 23-08-2024. The veracity financial bid on 20-08-2024 is doubtful.
19B. That the respondent authorities could not have opened of financial bid as the representation of petitioner was still pending before it. Thus, the opening of financial bid is in clear violation of clause 22.6 of Standard Bidding Document (SBD).”
It is further submitted that further amendment may be allowed, which is
Page No.# 5/5
as under:-
IV. "A writ of certiorari should not be issued quashing and setting aside the impugned financial bid opening dated 20-08-2024 as illegal and arbitrary."
Mr. G. Tarak, learned Standing Counsel, RWD, for the opposite parties/respondents has raised no objection to the said prayer.
Having considered the grounds for amendment and the prayer not being objected to by the learned counsel for the respondents, an amendment in WP(C) 344/2024 incorporating the three paragraphs as 19A and 19B and 8-IV in the prayer portion is allowed.
I.A.(C) stands allowed and disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
M/s N T Agency
The State of AP
Kardak Ete
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court