ANANTA BORGOHAIN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. B Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Nr. N Goswami, learned Junior Government Advocate for the respondents No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively being the authorities under the Town and Urban Development Department, the Director of Municipal Administration, the Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur and the Executive Officer, Dhakuakhana Municipal Board. Although notice was issued to the respondent No. 5 as per the office note dtd. 21/10/2022, but no further information is available as to whether notice has been served or not.

(2.) The petitioner participated in a NIT dtd. 24/8/2022 for the work of construction of Community Toilet at Dhakuakhana Public Bus Stand Campus under 15th Finance Commission (Tied Fund) under Dhakuakhana Municipal Board. The value of the work as per the tender notice is provided to be Rs.17, 45, 000.00. As per the comparative statement, the respondent No. 5 Sri Pranabjyoti Das quoted a rate at par the estimate i.e. the Government value provided in the NIT itself, whereas the petitioner Sri Ananta Borgohain submitted a tender bid of 10% below the estimated Government rate. By the order impugned dtd. 8/9/2022, the work had been allotted to the respondent No. 5. Being aggrieved, this writ petition is instituted on the ground that the rate quoted by the petitioner being lower, it was arbitrary on the part of the respondent authorities to allot the work to the respondent No. 5.

(3.) When the matter was taken up on 29/9/2022, it was informed by the learned counsel for the State authorities that the respondent No. 5 had already commenced the work and completed nearly 13% work till date. In the circumstance, no interim order was passed.