ACHYUT BARUAH Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the writ petitions based on same set of facts involving the same issue and the question of law, were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. The facts material for the purpose of disposal of the cases are indicated below:

(2.) THE petitioner in response to the tender notice No. 186 dated 25.1.2005 (Annexure -A) issued by the Superintendent of Central Jail, Guwahati (respondent No. 13), submitted his tender in respect of the contract for supply of dietary and other articles under Group -C of the tender Notice. Supply of the articles to the Central Jail, Guwahati was for the year 2005 -06. He quoted his bid amount at Rs. 8,72,300. As scheduled, the tenders were opened on 14.2.2005. According to 'the petitioner the tender submitted by him was found valid. The comparative statement in respect of the tenders was prepared and in the same the petitioner was included at serial No. 11, while the respondent No. 4 at serial No. 5. In the remark column there was no remark against the name of the petitioner, but against the name of the respondent No. 4, Smt. Kalpana Das the remark 'Invalids E/M by name of Nabajit Das', was inserted. According to the petitioner such remark had to be made in view of the fact that the respondent No. 4 submitted earnest money in the name one Shri Nabajit Das and not in her name which is against Clause No. 5 of the NIT. Thus, according to the petitioner the respondent No. 4 was not entitled to get the work order, her tender being defenctive, it is the further case of the petitioner that there was another valid tender at serial No. 10 above him.

(3.) AS in the first writ petition, in this writ petition also the grievance made is in respect of the settlement made in favour of the respondent No. 4 (Shri Nabajit Das) pursuant to the NIT in question. In response to the NIT dated 25.1.2005 (Annexure -A) issued by the Superintendent, District Jail, Mongoldoi (respondent No. 3), the petitioner submitted his tender in respect of the contract for supply of dietary and other articles under Group -D of the tender notice to the District Jail, Mongoldoi for the year 2005 -06 offering a bid value of Rs. 4,77,500 only. As scheduled, the tenders were opened on 14.2.2005 and according to the petitioner his tender was found to be valid having conformed to the requirement of the tender notice. Comparative statement etc. were prepared and the respondent No. 3 by his letter dated 12.3.2005 while forwarding the tender papers to the respondent No. 2 indicated that the tender submitted by the respondent No. 4 was not found correct as he had furnished National Savings Certificate (NSC) for Rs. 1,000 standing in the name of one Smt. Jurismeeta Deka. According to the petitioner, in the comparative statement his name was included at serial No. 9 and that of the respondent No. 4 at serial No. 7 with the remark 'invalid - E/M furnished by the name of the Jurismeeta Deka. It is the case of the petitioner that such furnishing of earnest money by the respondent No. 4 was against the mandate; of Clause No. 5 of the NIT. According to the petitioner there was only one valid tender, above him placed at serial No. 8 of the comparative statement. Thus, in this case also it is the grievance of the petitioner that acceptance off the tender submitted by the respondent No. 4 and issuance of work order dated 29.4.2005 in his favour pursuant to the recommendation of the Inspect of Prisons, Assam by his letter dated 28.4.2005 is illegal and arbitrary.