BAHARUL ISLAM (MD.) Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. PC Dey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M Bhagabati, learned State counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6, Mr. I Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 and Mr. MU Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5.

(2.) The Chief Executive Officer, Darrang Zila Parishad, Mangaldoi had invited a short tender notice on 29.11.2012 in respect of construction of office building of Paschim Mangaldoi Anchalik Panchayat from Class-II registered contractors having experience of work done of similar nature amounting to Rs. 8 lakhs during the last three years. The requirement, amongst others, was that there has to be a certificate to that effect and the registration of the tenderer as a Class-II must be valid up to 31.3.2012. The tender process had the participation of seven bidders out of which the petitioner as well as respondent No.5 were party to it. The comparative statement was prepared and thereafter, the work in question was awarded to the respondent No.5 vide work order dated 19.2.2013.

(3.) The petitioner has put to challenge the said work order dated 19.2.2013 primarily on the ground that the same could have been done in view of the condition Nos.16, 17 and 18 of the terms and conditions applicable to the contract in hand. Clause 16 pertains to furnishing of Court fee stamp, clause 17 pertains to furnishing of income tax and sales tax clearance certificate and clause 18 pertains to expressing the rates in the tender both in words and figures. The petitioner submits that besides clause 16, 17 and 18 above, clause 9 of the tender notice pertaining to experience certificate is also an essential condition which is to be given due weightage. In this connection, the petitioner submits that the work experience certificate produced by the respondent No.5 and enclosed to the writ petition, is a certificate given by the Chief Executive Officer, Darrang Zila Parishad, Mangaldoi, who is an integral part of the tender process. Learned counsel for the petitioner while maintaining his stand that the experience certificate as required of him is an essential condition and cannot be ignored, relied upon the decisions as follows;