Simanta Gogoi v. The State of Assam and 4 Ors

ORDER

18.03.2024

¶1Heard Mr. G. Pegu, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that Notice Inviting e-Bid dated 20.12.2023 had been issued by the respondents for grant of IMFL Retail Off Licence for various places in Lakhimpur Districty, including Shop No.LKP 13 at C.D Road, Lakhimpur District. However, the respondents issued re-bid notice on 23.02.2024.

¶2The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner's Technical Bid was rejected due to (i) the site plan not countersigned by the Executive Engineer/Assistant Executive Engineer of PWD(B) and (ii) violated Point No.22.3 of the bid documents.

¶3The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner had submitted his site plan countersigned by an Assistant Engineer, PWD. As the tender notice did not specify that the site plan had to be signed by the Executive Engineer/Assistant Page No.# 3/3 Executive Engineer of PWD, the site plan submitted by the petitioner, which was countersigned by an Assistant Engineer, PWD could not have been rejected.

¶4The petitioner's counsel submits that due to over-sight, petitioner has not made any challenge to rejection of his Technical Bid on the ground of violation of Point No.22.3 of the bid documents, which is to the following effect : "22.3 No Bidder shall contact any member of the Tender/Bid Committee on any matter relating to its bid, from the time of the opening of bids to the time of issue of the Letter of Acceptance (LoA). Any effort of the Bidder to influence the Tender/Bid Committee in its decision in respect of bid evaluation, bid comparison or issue of the Letter of Acceptance (LoA) shall result in the rejection of the bid and forfeiture of the EMD. During the bid preparation process, Bidders will focus their inquiries and communications, if any, to only the authorized nodal officer of the District Commissioner."

¶5Mr. G. Pegu, learned counsel for the petitioner accordingly prays that he may be allowed to withdraw the writ petition, with liberty to file afresh, by allowing the petitioner to make a challenge to the other ground for rejecting the petitioner's Technical Bid, if grounds for the same are present.

¶6Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned counsel appears for the Excise Department.

¶7The prayer of the petitioner's counsel is allowed.

¶8The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for, if so advised.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010058742024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/1607/2024o SIMANTAoGOGOIo S/O-oBHADRESWARoGOGOI,o R/O-oMILONoNAGAR,oP.S-oGHILAMARA,o DIST-oLAKHIMPUR,oASSAM,oPIN-787053 VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo4oORSo REP.oBYoTHEoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM,oEXCISEo DEPARTMENT,o oDISPUR,oGUWAHATI-06 2:THEoCOMMISSIONERoOFoEXCISE o oGOVERNMENToOFoASSAMo oHOUSEFEDoCOMPLEX oDISPUR-BELTOLAoROAD oGUWAHATI-6. 3:THEoDISTRICToCOMMISSIONER oCUMoCHAIRMANo oE-oBIDDINGoCOMMITTEE oLAKHIMPUR oASSAM oPIN-787001 4:THEoSUPERINTENDENToOFoEXCISEoDEPARTMENT oLAKHIMPUR oASSAM oPIN-787001 5:DHURBAJYOTIoSAIKIA Page No.# 2/3 S/O- DHANESHWAR SAIKIA R/O- KHELMATI WARD NO-14 NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST- LAKHIMPUR PIN-78700 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G PEGU Advocate for the Respondent : SC, EXCISE DEPTT. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA