DIGANTA BORAH Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These set of writ appeals have been heard together and are being disposed off by this common judgment.

(2.) We have heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. R.M. Deka and Mr. D.J. Das, learned Advocates for the appellants in WA No.386/2024; WA No.388/2024; WA No. 397/2024; WA No.427/2024 and WA No.428/2024; Mr. D. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the appellants in WA Nos.381/2024; WA No.393/2024; WA No. 41/2025 and WA No. 82/2025; and Mr. J. Kalita, learned Advocate for respondent No.5 in WA No.386/2024; WA No.388/ 2024; WA No.397/2024; WA No.427/2024 and WA No.428/2024 and for respondent No.1 in WA No.381/2024; WA No.393/2024; WA No.41/2025 and WA No.82/2025.

(3.) By the impugned judgment dtd. 27/9/2024 passed in WP(C) No.1069/2024 and connected writ petitions, a learned Single Judge of this Court has opined that the process adopted for allotting the works to the appellants in WA No.386/2024; WA No.388/2024; WA No.397/2024; WA No.427/2024 and WA No.428/2024, was not in accordance with law and thus has directed that the work orders dtd. 6/1/2024 be not acted upon henceforth. However, it was clarified that since the work was carried out against such work orders, the balance work should be given to another eligible bidder, who would qualify for the work pursuant to the tender process.