KUMUD BARMAN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the order dated 24.06.2005 issued by the Director, Health Services, Assam approving the rates quoted by the respondents No. 5 for supply of dietary articles to Mangaldai Civil Hospital during the year 2005-2006 i.e. from 1.7.05 to 30.6.2005, in Groups-I to VI and consequently issuing work orders For supply of the said articles.

(2.) The facts in brief is that a notice inviting tender was issued by the Joint Director, Health Services, Darrang, Mangaldai on 28.3.2005 inviting tender for supply of dietary articles to the Superintendent, Mangaldai Civil Hospital, Mangaldai for the period commencing from 1.4.2005 to 31.3.06 in VI groups namely Group I, II, III, IV, V and VI fixing 22.3.05 as the last date for submission of tender, stipulating that the rate will be accepted groupwise and sample will be required for item No. 1 to 9 of the items of Group-I and reserving right by the authority to accept any tender or not to accept lowest or any other tender without showing any reason thereof. Accordingly 11 tenderers including the petitioner and respondent No. 5 submitted their tenders in respect of the items mentioned in various groups. The tenders were opened on the date fixed for the purpose, by the tender committee constituted vide office order dated 18.3.2005 issued by the Joint Director, Health Services, Darrang, Mangaldai and prepared the comparative statement. Out of the 11 tenderers, 8 (eight) tenderers including the petitioners and the respondents No. 5 submitted their tenders in respect of all the groups. The tender committee found that the rates quoted by the petitioner in respect of Group I and II, to be lowest, that of Umesh Kalita and one Mainuddin to be lowest in respect of Group III and IV and one Subhash Barman to be lowest in respect of Groups V and VI. The Joint Director, thereafter, vide communication dated 13.4.03 send all the tender papers to the Director, Health Services for approval. The Director, Health Services vide communication dated 24.6.2005 approved the rate offered by the respondent No. 5 in respect of all the VI groups for supply of dietary articles and accordingly work orders were issued to him. Hence the present writ petition.

(3.) I have heard Ms. Usha Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. A. K. Thakur, learned State counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and also Mr. A. S. Chowdhury, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.5.