Radhe Chandra Das v. The State of Assam and 5 Ors

ORDER Date : 17-12-2024 Heard Ms. P Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner is a bidder for settlement of the 79 No. Chatla Fishery under Kolgachia Revenue Circle pursuant to Tender Notice dated

07.10.2024. The bids were opened on 29.10.2024 and it was found that three persons had participated in the tender process. While the petitioner was H2, the respondent No. 6 was H1. The petitioner's counsel submits that the respondent No. 6 is a defaulter in respect of another Fishery, namely Nos. 20/42/54/69 Balaisuti Group Fishery for an amount of Rs.4,07,900/-.

¶2The petitioner's counsel submits that in respect of the present Tender Notice dated 07.10.2024, the respondent No. 6 had submitted a false Bakijai clearance certificate. The petitioner apprehends that the Fishery would be settled with the respondent No. 6, despite the respondent No. 6 being a defaulter.

¶3Mr. P Sharma, learned counsel for the Fishery Department and Mr. M Chetia, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 submit that the petitioner's case is based only on apprehension and speculation. They submit that the present case is a pre-mature case.

¶4I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶5As correctly stated by the counsels for the respondents, the present writ petition is a pre-mature case, as the petitioner apprehends that the respondent Page No.# 3/3 No. 6 would be settled with the Fishery despite being a defaulter. Though this Court is of the view that the petitioner has got no locus standi, at this juncture, to file the present writ petition, this Court is of the view that the submission made by the petitioner's counsel should be considered by the Tender Evaluation Committee, keeping in view the letter No. BRF-1/2016/352 dated 30.08.2024 issued by the Additional District Commissioner (Fishery), Barpeta, which states that the respondent No. 6 is a defaulter.

¶6Consequently, this writ petition is disposed with a direction to the respondent No. 3, to consider as to whether the respondent No. 6 is a defaulter, as has been alleged by the petitioner in this case prior to finalizing the tender. The same is subject to the condition that the tender is not finalized prior to receiving a copy of this order and a copy of the writ petition, which is to be furnished to the respondent No. 3 by the petitioner. The decision to be taken by the respondent No. 3 should be made, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the respondent No. 6.

¶7The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010270472024 ooooooo 2024:GAU-AS:12799 ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/6787/2024o RADHEoCHANDRAoDASo S/OoGENDUoRAMoDAS,oR/OoVILL-oPALAHORTOL,oREVENUEoVILLAGEo BARADI,oP.O.-BARADI,oP.S.-BARPETA,oDIST-BARPETA VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo5oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoSECRETARYoGOVT.oOFoASSAM,o FISHERIESoDEPARTMENT,oDISPUR,oGUWAHATI-06 2:DISTRICToFISHERYoDEVELOPMENToOFFICER oDIST-BARPETA 3:THEoCIRCLEoOFFICER oDIST-BARPETA 4:THEoREGISTRARoOFoFISHERIES oDISPUR oGUWAHATI 5:GOPALoCHANDRAoDAS oS/OoMADHUoSARKAR oR/OoJONIAoCHELIKURA oDIST-BARPETo AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMS.oPoCHAKRABORTY,oMS.oKoKHAN,MS.oAoDASo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oSC,oFISHERY,oGA,oASSAMoo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA