GAUTAM KALITA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. A. M. Mazumdar, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Ms. B. S. Sinha, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1. HEARD also Mr. A. Bhuyan, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4.

(2.) BY making this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has impugned the tender notice, dated 19.01.2009, whereby tenders have been invited for settlement of, amongst others, Neemati-Kamalabari Ferry Service, for the financial year 2009-2010.

(3.) FROM a careful reading of Section 8, what clearly transpires is that though a public ferry may be settled by public auction, or otherwise than by public auction, the fact remains that the leasing out of a public ferry falls within the realm of public domain. The State cannot, therefore, adopt pick and choose policy, while granting lease of public ferry. Ordinarily, therefore, endeavour of the State shall be to settle public ferry by allowing all interested persons to participate in the competitive process of selection. Thus, ideally, public ferry shall be settled by public auction. It is only in exceptional circumstances, where a ferry cannot be settled by way of public auction, because, for instance, no one is willing to run a given public ferry, that the provisions of sub-Rule (1) of Rule 4 of the Control and Management of the Ferry Rules (in short, 'the rules'), 1968, may be resorted to, which empower the Secretary of the department concerned to settle a public ferry directly, or by negotiation, subject to certain conditions specified therein.