VAIRABEE ASSOCIATES Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in both the cases. Also heard Mr. Y. Doloi, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, representing the respondents. Both these writ petitions arise out of common facts and hence, are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The Inland Water Transport Department, Assam, is responsible for operating three Ferry Services from Neamati to Majuli out of which Neamati-Kamalabari Ferry Service is one of them. On expiry of the existing lease for the year 2014-15 the respondent Inland Water Transport (I.W.T.) Department had floated a tender for settlement of the Neamati-Kamalabari Ferry Service by publishing the notice dated 13.12014 in the vernacular daily newspaper i.e. the Dainik Janambhumi. Since only two tenders were received in response to the notice dated 13.12014, hence, the tender process was called off by the department and the re-tender notice dated 25.02015 was issued. Pursuant to the notice dated 25.02015, an order of settlement dated 18.06.2015 was issued in favour of one Om Prakash Agarwalla. The said order of settlement dated 18.06.2015 was challenged before this Court in WP(C) No. 3697/2015. Taking note of the fact that settlement granted in favour Om Prakash Agarwalla had been withdrawn by the department during the pendency of the proceeding, this Court had passed an order dated 04.09.2015 disposing of the writ petition with a direction to the departmental authorities to process the settlement by inviting fresh tender and complete the same within a period of two months. In terms of the order dated 04.09.2014, a fresh tender notice dated 25.09.2015 was issued by the authorities for settlement of the Neamati-Kamalabari Ferry Service but the said NIT was also challenged before this Court by filing WP(C) No. 6302/2015 and WP(C) No. 574/2016. By order dated 01.08.2016 this Court had disposed of both these writ petitions with a direction upon the department to publish a fresh tender notice for settlement of the Neamati-Kamalabari Ferry Service by bearing in mind the schedule of rate that was notified on 27.08.2010. In terms of the directions contained in the order dated 01.08.2016 the respondent No.5 had issued re-tender notice dated 29.09.2016 inviting bids for settlement of the Ferry Service but had later cancelled the said notice vide order dated 17.10.2016. Thereafter, again on 06.12016 a re-tender notice was issued for settlement of the Neamati-Kamalabari Ferry Service for the remaining period of the financial year 2016-17 fixing the value of the "Ghat" at Rs. 1,32,35,000/-.

(3.) Responding to the NIT dated 06.12.2016 the petitioner, besides five other tenderers, had submitted their bids. On opening of the tenders, the rate quoted by the petitioner emerged as the highest offer. According to the petitioner, under the rules, the petitioner was entitled to an order of settlement on the basis of its offered rate but the authorities did not take any action for awarding the settlement in favour of the petitioner.