RAMU UDDIN MAZUMDAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common judgment, writ petitions W. P. (C) Nos. 9160 of 2004 and 9619 of 2004 are disposed of as they arise but of identical facts and circumstances.

(2.) the petitioner in Writ Petition (C) No. 9610 of 2004 is engaged in the business of contract works. He had submitted tender papers in pursuance of the NIT dated 19.4.2003 issued by the Respondent No. 2 for construction of RCC Bridge No. 4/1 on SMD Road across 'River Amjur under REDF-VIII of NABARD at an estimated cost of Rs. 414.40 lakhs. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner was the lowest eligible bidder and the department accordingly accepted the bid offered by him. By the letter dated 12.11.2004 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition), the Chief Engineer, PWD (ARIASP & RiDF), Assam informed him that the offer made by him Has been accepted by the Department and he is required to submit performance security in terms of ITB Clause 33 within seven days from the date of issue of the letter of acceptance. The petitioner's case is that neither he has received this letter nor he authorized anybody to receive the same on his behalf. He came to know that his offer was accepted only when the Department re-tendered the work vide NIT dated 17.11.2004 (Annexure-11 to the writ petition). After necessary enquiry, he came to know that the Chief Engineer by the letter dated 12.11.2004 had already accepted his bid and directed him to furnish performance security. Having failed to obtain the letter of acceptance renewed, he has filed the petition for appropriate orders including an order directing the respondents to issue the work order in his favour.

(3.) The Respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 in their affidavit-in-opposition admitted the above position and submitted that the letter of acceptance dated 12.11.2004 was received by a representative of the petitioner, ;as is the normal practice. The petitioner failed to furnish the performance security arid to sign the contract. Thereafter, letter dated 13.12.2004 was written to the Commissioner and Special Secretary, PWD informing him that the petitioner has failed to respond to the letter of acceptance. The Deputy Secretary by the letter dated 14.12.2004 directed the Respondent No. 2 to retender the work in question and for other ten other construction works. Accordingly, after cancellation of the previous orders, a fresh tender dated 17.12.2004 was issued.