NARAYAN PRASAD NIROLA Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner makes a prayer for quashing the work contract given to the 3rd respondent by the Department of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services for fencing the entire land acquired at Samdong busty, East Sikkim for setting up a farm in that area with a further prayer to direct allotment of work to him accordance with the Home Department Circular dated 24-9-1991 (Annexure P-1) , read with another Circular dated 14-2-1995 (Annexure P-3).

(2.) Briefly stated, the department of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services chalked out a scheme for fencing the entire land acquired at Samdong busty, East Sikkim for setting up a farm at an estimated cost of Rs. 2. 27 lakhs, which was also sanctioned. Since the work fell within the revenue block and the value of the work was below Rs. 5. 00 lakhs, the petitioner claimed that the work contract ought to have been given to a nominee of the Panchayat in terms of the Circular dated 24-9-1991 (Annexure P-1) , which was modified by enhancing the value of work from Rs. 5. 00 lakhs to Rs. 10. 00 lakhs by another Circular dated 14-2-1995, (Annexure P-3). It was further claimed by the petitioner that he was the nominee of the Panchayat as well as of the local M. L. A. , whereas the 3rd respondent was not such a nominee and, therefore, the work could not be allotted to him, but could be given only to the petitioner. Accordingly, aggrieved by the award of contract to the 3rd respondent, the petitioner has filed this petition for the said reliefs.

(3.) The 1st, 2nd and the 4th respondents have filed a joint counter-affidavit, denying the claim of the petitioner and justifying the grant in favour of the 3rd respondent on various grounds, which shall be considered hereafter.