(1.) I have heard Mr. C. Barua, the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. N.W. Saikia, the learned Advocate General, Arunachal Pradesh assisted by Mrs. G. Deka, the learned G.A., AP and also heard Mr. P. Khataniar, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.
(2.) This matter relates to the carriage contract of Public Distribution System (PDS) from FCI Depot, Dhemaji/North Lakhimpur to Upper Siang district of Arunachal Pradesh for the period 1.4.2000 to 31.3.2001. Pursuant to the Notice Inviting Tender (NIT), the petitioner along with others applied for the aforesaid carriage contract. After receipt of various applications the Selection Board sat on 16.12.99 and recommended the case of the petitioner as he has fulfilled all the tennis and conditions specified by the Government in the NIT. However, before the petitioner has been appointed, the allegation is that the Minister in Charge of Civil Supply and Consumer Affairs, Arunachal Pradesh wrote a letter to the Deputy Commissioner concerned to consider the case of the respondent No.3 in place of the petitioner. Thereafter, the Selection Board sat 2nd time on 24.1.2000 and had reviewed the earlier proceeding and recommended the case of the 3rd respondent in the subsequent meeting. The entire allegation to this fact has been made in paragraph 11 of the affidavit-in-reply along with a detailed note sheet initiated in this regard. The averment made in paragraph 11 has not been controverted by the respondents by filing counter. However, the record has been called and the learned Advocate General, as directed, has produced the relevant record and it has been perused. Since the allegation made in paragraph 11 alongwith the note sheet is relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition. It is quoted below:
(3.) It is alleged that recommendation of the 3rd respondent by the Board in its subsequent meeting on 24.1.2000 has been made at the dictate of Minister in charge of Civil Supply & Consumer Affairs by abusing the process of power. To my shocking surprise, when the original file is produced, the note quoted in paragraph 11 of the affidavit-in-reply which reads as under: "Regarding awarding of carriage contract to Sri Karmi Taipodia. a letter received from the Hon'ble Minister. Civil Supply & Consumer Affairs is put up at page 3 for perusal and further order"