This Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an e-procurement tender for distributary construction. The petitioners sought directions to hold pani panchayat elections before executing the work. The Court found no nexus between the tender and the election requirement and dismissed the matter.
null
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.
W.P.(C) No.19625 of 2020
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MOHAMMAD RAFIQ HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI
Mr. S.K. Nanda : For the Petitioners Mr. P.P. Mohanty, A.G.A. : For the State-Opp. Parties
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the parties by Video Conferencing mode.
The petitioners have filed this writ petition challenging the impugned notice of tender (E-Procurement) under Annexure-1, as well as the agreement in consequence of such procurement and also seek direction to the opposite parties not to allow the pani panchayats of the respective distributaries to execute the work in the respective distributory/pani panchayat as per the mandate of law for self governance for upliftment of the farmers. They further seek direction to the opposite parties to complete the election of pani panchayat No.21 and constitute the apex body for execution of the work properly.
Mr. S.K. Nanda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the E-Procurement Notice No.EE, TID, SNP-01/2020-21 has been issued inviting bids for execution of different works which has been sought not to be executed without conducting election of pani panchayats. As such, the construction work is to be done for the benefit of the pani panchayats.
Mr. P.P. Mohanty, learned Addl. Government Advocate contended that the writ petition at the instance of the petitioners is not maintainable as the term of such elected pani panchayats have already been over since 2011, after completion
-2-
of their tenure of three years, as the election was conducted in the year 2008. It is further contended that the impugned notice under Annexure-1 inviting bids has been issued mostly for construction of certain distributaries and in the event the same is not done, it will cause damage to such pani panchayats. As such, the petitioners should not have come to this Court, in the garb of challenging the tender, to conduct the election of pani panchayats. It is also contended that similar question had come up for consideration before this Court in W.P.(C) No. 17014 of 2008, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 24.02.2012.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the records, it appears that the petitioners essentially claim that election of the pani panchayats should be held and thereafter the notice inviting bid under Annexure-1 put to effect. But, Annexure-1 the bid inviting tender relates to construction of some distributaries, which is beneficial to the pani panchayats and, as such, pani panchayat election has no nexus to such tender process.
In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed.
As Lock-down period is continuing for COVID-19, learned counsel may utilize the soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s website or print out thereof at par with certified copies in the manner prescribed, vide Court’s Notice No.4587, dated 25.03.2020.
(Dr. B.R. Sarangi) Judge
(Mohammad Rafiq) Chief Justice
Alok/Ashok
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging a procurement tender inviting bids for distributary construction is maintainable when the tender has no nexus with the conduct of pani panchayat elections.
Whether the High Court should entertain a petition seeking directions to constitute pani panchayats before the execution of a water infrastructure tender.
Whether the writ petition challenging the tender notice is appropriate when the term of the elected bodies has long expired.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P.(C) No. 17014 of 2008Referred¶11
1 provisions across 1 enactments
PETITIONERS
STATE
MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
B.R. SARANGI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
