KESHAB KALITA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R. Goswami, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. S. Sarma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 5.

(2.) Taking into consideration that issuance of notice at this stage insofar as the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 is concerned would neither be in the interest of the petitioner nor the respondent Nos. 3 and 4, this Court therefore dispenses with the notice upon the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 more so in view of the reasons given hereinunder.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that the Dhing Bazar (Athgaon Hat) is a daily and weekly market situated within Dhing Municipal Board and presently the said affairs are run through the Executive Officer i.e. the respondent No. 4 herein. The Dhing Municipal Board had floated a tender and the petitioner being the highest bidder was approved and allotted the lease for the financial year 2020- 21 with effect from 1/4/2020 to 31/3/2021. Thereupon on account of lockdown, the petitioner having suffered, the petitioner requested the Dhing Municipal Board to extend the period of the lease. Instead of extending the period of the lease, the Dhing Municipal Board floated a fresh NIT on 18/2/2021. However, on account of Model Code of Conduct coming into play in view of the announcement made by the Election Commission of India on 26/3/2021, the said tender documents in against the tender dtd. 18/2/2021 could not be opened and the respondent No. 4 vide an order dtd. 25/3/2021 granted an extension to the petitioner for a period of 3(three) months with effect from 1/4/2021 to 30/6/2021. It is the further case of the petitioner that though the petitioner was granted an extension but on account of various lockdowns during the said period he could not recoup his losses for which he again requested for granting a further extension. As the request was refused and the respondent No. 4 issued an NIT dtd. 10/6/2021, the petitioner again on 11/6/2021 requested for granting an extension from 1/7/2021 to 31/3/2022. The respondent No. 4 granted a further extension to the petitioner for a period of 3(three) months with effect from 1/7/2021 to 30/9/2021. Thereafter, again the petitioner filed a representation seeking 6(six) months extension which was denied for which the petitioner had approached this Court by filing a writ petition i.e. WP(C) No. 5558/2021. This Court directed the respondent No. 4 to dispose of the representation within a period of 10(ten) days from the date of the order and in the event if the respondent No. 4 was not conferred with the power of granting extension of the lease of the market to forward the petitioner's representation within 4(four) days to the competent authority who had the power to take a decision on the prayer of extension of the lease of the market. Thereupon for another 2(two) months the Dhing Municipal Board verbally extended the settlement period to the petitioner. The respondent No. 4 thereafter floated another NIT dtd. 28/10/2021 and the petitioner having was granted the settlement for a period from 1/12/2021 to 31/3/2022. The petitioner thereafter again filed a representation on 21/1/2022 seeking extension however the respondent No. 4 did not given any heed to the petitioner's representation and instead issued a fresh NIT bearing No. DMB.69/SB/2019-20/675 dtd. 14/3/2022.