SIEVILIE SOKHA Vs. STATE OF NAGALAND & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the writ petitions involve identical issues and since the writ petitions were based identical facts, the writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Heard Sri Kekhriengulie, learned counsel for the writ petitioner - M/s Sievilie Sokha in WP(C) No. 121(K) of 2009 and Sri A.A. Chasie, learned counsel for the writ petitioner - M/s Kelelhunei Angami in WP(C) No. 46 (K) of 2010.1 have also heard Smt. Y. Longkumer, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the State respondents. However, the other tenderer Sri Seyiekhrielie Nagi (respondent No. 5) is unrepresented.

(3.) In view of counter writ petitions I would refer the parties as per the Cause Title given in WP(C) No. 121(K) of 2009 for easy reference. It is also mentioned here that the respondent No. 5 Sri Seyiekhrielie Nagi had also filed Writ Petition No. 4 (K) of 2009, challenging the supply orders issued in pursuance of NIT dated 01.02.2008. Finally, the writ petition was dismissed for default. In the aforesaid writ petition, the State respondents had filed an affidavit-in-opposition and the learned Government Advocate submitted that the said affidavit may also be considered as an affidavit of the State respondents in the present writ petitions.