DOMAN MANDAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the appellant, Doman Mandal, against the judgment dated 7th October, 2004 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 6208 of 2003, whereby and where under, the decision of a departmental committee dated 1st December, 2003 recommending allotment of tender in favour of appellant/5th respondent and the order of allotment of tender work dated 4th December, 2003, issued by the Chief Engineer, Rural Development (Special Range), Jharkhand, Ranchi, were cancelled and the writ petition was allowed in favour of writ petitioner 6th respondent herein, namely, Shailesh Kumar Ganesh.

(2.) THE present case relates to allotment of work in pursuance of a Notice Inviting Tender No. 01/2002 -03 (N.I.T. for short) for awarding contract of 46 (forty six) different kinds of construction works, which were to be made in the district of Jamtara. Initially, Tender was called for from Registered Contractors, but later on, by Corrigendum, Clause (9) of the N.I.T. was diluted and the Non -registered Contractors having sufficient experience, were allowed to participate in the tender, obtaining permission from the competent authority. In the N.I.T., different stringent clauses were laid down. As per Clause (12) of the N.I.T., tenderers were required to submit Labour Licence; Character Certificates; Up -to -date Income tax and Sales Tax Clearance Certificates etc. The work at Item No. 41 of the N.I.T. relates to construction of a Bridge at Joria situated between Barsani to Barhai Road in the district of Jamtara. The present appeal relates work at Item No. 41 of the N.I.T. i.e. construction of a Bridge at Joria.

(3.) INITIALLY , the work order was issued in favour of the 6th respondent -Shailesh Kumar Ganesh on 2nd May, 2003, but before execution of agreement, the order of allotment was cancelled by the Chief Engineer and it was allotted in favour of the appellant -Doman Mandal, at the behest of one Central Minister, namely, Mr. Sibu Soren, M.P. The 6th respondent, thereafter moved before this Court in W.P. (C) No. 2710 of 2003, in which the Engineer -in -Chief, R.E.O. appeared and informed that no formal order of cancellation of contract in favour of 6th respondent had been issued. He also accepted that the note given by him on 11th June, 2003 in favour of appellant was not, in accordance with law, and assured that it will not be acted upon and he will withdraw the same. Having noticed the aforesaid statement made by the Engineer -in -Chief, R.E.O., Jharkhand, the writ petition was disposed of on 20th June, 2003 allowing the competent authority to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Thereafter, a fresh work order was issued in favour of the 6th respondent -Shailesh Kumar Ganesh on 25th August, 2003 and an agreement was executed on 22nd September, 2003.