Iman Ali v. The State of Assam and 5 Ors

ORDER

01.04.2024

Heard Mr. B.J. Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner participated in the NIT dated 28.06.2022 for settlement of the ferry service pertaining to Bhuragaon-Badlichar, via Pavakati, Malahu, Kalichar, Chitalmari and Karaikhowa for a period of 2 financial years, i.e., from 2022-2024. Though the petitioner was the successful bidder, the settlement of the ferry service could not be made with the petitioner immediately, on account of one unsuccessful bidder having challenged the settlement process vide WP(C) No. 1167/2023. WP(C) No. 1167/2023 was dismissed on 19.06.2023 and the petitioner was thereafter allowed to run the ferry service, vide lease deed dated 16.06.2023, for a period of 9 & ½ months, as against 2 years of the proposed settlement.

¶2The petitioner's counsel submits that as the petitioner should have been allowed to run the ferry service for 2 years, the petitioner had submitted a representation dated 04.03.2024, addressed to the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Transport Department, with a prayer that the Page No.# 3/3 petitioner should be allowed to run the ferry service till 16.06.2025. He submits that no decision has been taken by the respondents with regard to the petitioner's representation.

¶3Ms. M.D. Borah, learned Standing Counsel, Transport, on the other hand, submits that a fresh tender notice No. 67 dated 08.02.2024 had been issued for the said ferry service, for a period of 2 years from 01.04.2024 to 31.03.2026. She submits that the same has not been put to challenge by the writ petitioner. She also submits that the settlement of the ferry service had been made with the petitioner for the remaining period 2022-2024 w.e.f the date of taking over by the petitioner up to 31.03.2024 as per letter dated 09.02.2023, issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Transport Department.

¶4At this stage, Mr. B.J. Mukherjee, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be allowed to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file afresh.

¶5The prayer of the petitioner is allowed.

¶6The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010063412024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/1775/2024o IMANoALIo S/O-oLATEoJAMURUDDIN,o R/O-oNON-K-GARAPARI,o P.O.-oDHULA,oDIST.-oDARRANG,o ASSAM,oPIN-o784146. VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo5oORS.o REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCHIEFoSECRETARY,o DISPUR,oGUWAHATI-6. 2:THEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM oTRANSPORToDEPARTMENT oDISPUR oGUWAHATI-06. 3:THEoDEPUTYoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM oTRANSPORToDEPARTMENT oDISPUR oGUWAHATI-06. 4:THEoDIRECTOR oINLANDoWATERoTRANSPORT oULUBARI oGUWAHATI-07. 5:THEoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONER oDARRANG oMANGALDAI oASSAM. Page No.# 2/3 6:THE CIRCLE OFFICER DALGAON REVENUE CIRCLE DARRANG ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M BISWAS Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA