ABHINANDAN TRADING P LTD Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The very same order dated 14.7.2005 granting the contract for supply of potable alcohol/rectified spirit to the Tinsukia Excise Warehouse in favour of the respondent No. 3 being the subject matter of challenge in both the writ petitions, the writ petitions were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

(2.) A notice inviting tenders for wholesale supply of potable alcohol/rectified spirit (Grade-I) to the Excise Warehouse at Tinsukia was published by the Commissioner of Excise, Government of Assam, on 29.1.2005. The writ petitioner in WP(C) No. 5305 of 2005, Satya Capital Services (P) Ltd., submitted its tender quoting an amount of Rs. 15.10 per LPL for award of the contract. The petitioner in WP(C) No. 5132 of 2005, Abhinandan Trading (P) Ltd., quoted its rate of Rs. 18.95 per LPL whereas the respondent No. 3 Rangpur Trade Company (P) Ltd. quoted the rate of Rs. 17.11 per LPL. Eight tenders in all including those submitted by the parties to the present proceedings, as noticed above, were received pursuant to the NIT dated 29.1.2005. The tenders were opened on 11.3.2005 and after processing the same the Commissioner of Excise submitted his report to the State Government on 10.5.2005. In the report so submitted the Commissioner of Excise found three of the tenders including the one submitted by the writ petitioner in WP(C) No. 5303/2005 to be defective. The remaining five tenders including those of the writ petitioner in WP(C) No. 5132 of 2005 and the respondent No. 3 were forwarded to the State Government for consideration. In the aforesaid report submitted to the State Government, the Commissioner of Excise had worked out the viable/reasonable rate for supply of potable alcohol/rectified spirit to the warehouse at Rs. 18.23 per LPL. The aforesaid viable/reasonable rate was worked out by the Commissioner of Excise pursuant to Clause 28 of the NIT and after taking into account the various factors specifically enumerated in the aforesaid clause 28 of the NIT. The writ petitioner in WP(C) No. 5305 2005 having come to know that the tender submitted by it has been found by the Commissioner of Excise to be defective instituted a writ proceeding before this Court which was registered and numbered as WP(C) No. 4208 of 2005. In the aforesaid writ petition the two alleged grounds on which the tender of the aforesaid writ petitioner was found to be defective i.e. that the petitioner had not submitted up-to-date sale tax clearance certificate and that the petitioner had defaulted in running the North Lakhimpur Excise Warehouse which was earlier granted to it was specifically challenged. This court, while entertaining the aforesaid writ petition i.e. WP(C) No. 4208 of 2005 by an order dated 8.6.2005, took note of the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner in the case which were to the effect that the petitioner had a valid sales tax clearance certificate for the financial year ending 2005 and that the petitioner was not a lessee, at any point of time, in respect of the North Lakhimpur Warehouse. Accordingly, this Court directed that the aforesaid two contentions advanced before the Court should be taken into account by the authority while making final settlement pursuant to the NIT issued and the tenders received in response thereto. Thereafter, on 20.7.2005 the State respondents in WP(C) No. 4208 of 2005 filed an affidavit before the Court stating that the tender submitted by the petitioner was found to be a valid tender and the same was considered alongwith other valid tenders received and pursuant thereto by an order dated 14.7.2005 the contract for the supply of potable alcohol/rectified spirit was awarded to M/s Rangpur Trading Company (P) Ltd. i.e. respondent No. 3. On the basis of the stand taken by the State in WP(C) No. 4208 of 2005 the aforesaid writ petition was withdrawn and thereafter the petitioner in the said writ petition had instituted WP(C) No. 5305 of 2005 which has been heard along with the connected writ petition i.e. WP(C) No. 5132 of 2005.

(3.) Shri H. Roy, learned senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioner in WP(C) No. 5305 of 2005, Shri A.K. Goswami, learned senior counsel appearing in WP(C) No. 5132 of 2005 as well as Shri A.C. Buragohain, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, appearing for the official respondents in both the cases have been heard. Shri B.K. Goswami, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3 in both the cases has also been heard. The records in original placed before the Court by the official respondents have been duly perused and considered.