PIJUSH KANTI CHOWDHURY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court has been sought to be invoked by filing this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by putting to challenge the outcome of a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) dtd. 22/7/2014 issued by the Executive Officer, Silchar Municipal Board for operation and maintenance of two parks. The relief prayed for in this petition reads as follows:

(2.) The facts, as projected in the petition, in brief, are that Silchar Municipal Board (hereinafter SMB) had issued an NIT dtd. 22/7/2024 for Operation and Maintenance of the Gandhi Bagh Park and Norsingtola Park. The petitioner, who claims to be eligible for the allotment of the aforesaid work, had offered his bid whereby, 57% of the collection would be the share of the SMB. On the other hand, the respondent no. 8 had made an offer of 37%. The petitioner was directed to appear before the Tender Evaluation Committee and to place the plan. However, the petitioner could see that the respondent no. 8 was operating the work of maintenance. The petitioner could learn that on the grounds of lack of experience and non-furnishing of certain documents, his bid was rejected. It was also learnt that the work was allotted to the respondent no.8 at the rate offered by the petitioner. The writ petition was accordingly instituted.

(3.) I have heard Shri D. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Shri M. Chetia, learned State Counsel, Assam; Shri S. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. S. Mochahari, for the respondent nos. 6 and 7 and Shri S. Kataki, learned counsel for the respondent no. 8.