VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Gauhati High Court 2024 › High Court of Gauhati

New Evergreen Ngo v. The Guwahati Municipal Corporation and 2 Ors

Disposed Of
Court
High Court of Gauhati
Decided
11 December 2024
Bench
Michael Zothankhumaauthor
Case no.
WP(C) 5115/2024

Judgment

ORDER Date : 12.12.2024

Heard Mr. D. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3. Also heard Mr. P. Nayak, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

¶2The petitioner's grievance is that despite the bid of the respondent No. 3, being 91.80% below the base/estimated price, for "door to door collection and transportation of municipal waste", the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 have not taken the additional performance security from the respondent No. 3, in terms of the notification No. 530624/1 dated 30.07.2024 issued by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Finance Department.

¶3The petitioner's counsel submits that in terms of the above notification dated 30.07.2024, the additional performance security to be furnished by the respondent No. 3, over and above the performance security that is to be furnished, would amount to Rs. 1,48,89,744/-.

¶4Mr. P. Nayak, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 submits that the respondents will recalculate the amount of additional performance security that is to be provided by the respondent No. 3, in terms of the notification dated

30.07.2024. If it is found that the petitioner is to pay some more additional performance security beyond the amount of Rs.8,84,000/-, a demand notice for the same shall be made by the respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

¶5Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 submits that in Page No.# 3/4 the event, the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 have made a wrong calculation of the additional performance security to be submitted by the respondent No. 3, in terms of the notification dated 30.07.2024, the respondent No. 3 will pay the same once a demand notice is made by the respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

¶6I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶7The facts of the case is that the petitioner and the respondent No. 3, amongst others, had participated in the tender notice dated 12.07.2024, for carrying out "door to door collection and transportation of municipal waste" in various wards of the Guwahati Municipal Corporation. Though the respondent No. 3 had quoted Rs.4.10 per household per day for cleaning the waste of each household, which was 91.80% below the base/estimated price, the additional performance security that had been asked for by the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 from the respondent No. 3, may not have been done in terms of Clause 37.1 of the Tender Notice, read with the notification dated 30.07.2024.

¶8In view of the stand taken by the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 that they will recalculate the amount of additional performance security payable by the respondent No. 3, in terms of the notification dated 30.07.2024 and make a demand for the same, this Court directs the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 to make a recalculation of the additional performance security payable by the respondent No. 3 within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondent No. 3 shall thereafter make payment of the recalculated amount, if the same is made in terms of the notification dated 30.07.2024.

¶9It is needles to add that if the calculation already made by the respondent Page No.# 4/4 Nos. 1 & 2, i.e., Rs.8,84,000/- is found to be correct, no further demand notice be made by the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 from the respondent No. 3.

¶11The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Case details

Parties and counsel

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010204862024 ooooooo 2024:GAU-AS:12560 ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/5115/2024o NEWoEVERGREENoNGOo ANoNONoGOVERNMENTALoORGANIZATION,o HAVINGoITSoREGDoOFFICEoAToSHANTIPUR,oPROFESSORo COLONY,BHARALUMUKH,oGUWAHATI,KAMRUPo(M),oASSAM,oPIN-781009.o REPoBYoBIPILoHALOI,o S/OoNAGENoHALOI,oAGEo42oYRSo. VERSUSo THEoGUWAHATIoMUNICIPALoCORPORATIONoANDo2oORSo GANESHoMANDIR,oGUWAHATI,oPIN-781006oANDoREP.oBYoITSo COMMISSIONER 2:THEoCOMMISSIONER oTHEoGUWAHATIoMUNICIPALoCORPORATION oGANESHoMANDIRoGUWAHATI oPIN-781006 3:GUWAHATIoLADIESoCLUBo(GLC) oAoCONTRACTORoHAVINGoITSoREGD.oOFFICEoAToBIRUBARI oNIZARAPAR oP.O-oGOPINATHoNAGAR oP.S-oBHANGAGARH oGUWAHATI oKAMRUPo(M) oASSAM oPIN-78100o AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMRoDoDEKA,oMRoNoJoKUMARo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oSC,oGMC,oMR.oAoRoGOGOIo(R-3),MR.oRoSALOI(R-3)oo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.