ENKON PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in this art.226 petition dated August 3, 2010 are questioning the decision of the DGO(TT/AD), KMDA dated June 29, 2010 (at p.42). Relevant parts of the decision are quoted below: Kindly refer to your letter dated 7th June, 2010 in connection with the Hoarding sites required by Department of Information and Cultural Affairs. In this connection, I am to state that major widening and strengthening work is proposed to be undertaken on the EM Bypass for accommodating the proposed BRTS. It is, therefore, not possible to assist to your request at this stage.

(2.) I would like to add that it may kindly be noted that this being a requisition of Government of West Bengal which has already attracted inordinate delay is assuming serious proportions in their department is not appreciated. ENKON may kindly leave it to the Department of Information and Cultural Affairs to communicate their views. Mr Banerjee, counsel for the petitioners, has argued that in view of the recommendations of the Department of Information and Cultural Affairs of the Government of West Bengal the Development Authority was under an obligation to allot the sites especially when it has allotted sites to all similarly situated persons and bodies and has decided to put a few sites out to tender by putting a notice for the purpose in a newspaper on June 15, 2010 (at p.45). He has said that when citing a policy decision not to allot any site to anyone the Development Authority has refused to allot sites for which the Department of the Government recommended the petitioners, the Development Authority has decided to go ahead with the tender process on the basis of notice dated June 15, 2010.

(3.) On instructions, Mr Basu, counsel for the Development Authority, has submitted as follows. It is wrong to say that after taking the policy decision the Development Authority continued to allot sites to other similarly situated persons. In any case, this petition should be dismissed for the reason that the petitioners have suppressed a material fact that for the sites for which the Department of Information and Cultural Affairs of the Government of West Bengal had recommended them, and which were put by the Development Authority out to tender by the notice issued on June 15, 2010, the petitioners participated as a tenderer.