SAMPAD SAMAL Vs. STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A tender call notice was issued by opposite party no.3, Integrated Tribal Development Agency (ITDA), Kaptipada, Udala on 22.08.2015, which was in respect of 21 works. The dispute in the present petition relates to the AFR works at serial no.1 and 2. The petitioner, along with several other persons, had filed their tenders for serial no. 1 and 2. As per the tender conditions, the tenders were opened on 22.09.2015 and the petitioner was found to be the lowest bidder in respect of both the works, i.e., at serial no.1 and 2, which was after having been given the benefit of the resolution of the State Government dated 11.10.1977, as the petitioner belongs to scheduled caste/schedule tribe community.

(2.) When the opposite parties did not finalize the tender in his favour, on 21.11.2015, the petitioner filed a representation before opposite party no.3. Since the representation was not decided, the petitioner filed W.P.(C) No. 21633 of 2015, which was disposed of on 15.12015 with the direction to opposite party no.3, the Project Administrator, ITDA to dispose of the representation within a period of two months. Then, instead of first deciding the representation of the petitioner, opposite party no.3 vide its order dated 03.02016 cancelled the entire tender call notice dated 208.2015. Then, a day thereafter, i.e., on 04.02016 the representation of the petitioner was decided and he was informed that the entire tender call notice has itself been cancelled. Challenging the order dated 04.02016, as well as cancellation of the tender call notice dated 208.2015 vide order dated 03.02016, this writ petition has been filed.

(3.) We have heard Mr. A. K. Biswal, learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as Mr. B. Bhuyan, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the opposite parties, and perused the records. Pleadings having been exchanged and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage.