Chakra Dhar Das v. The State of Assam and 6 Ors

ORDER

23.10.2024

¶1Heard Mr. G. Baishya, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. I. Borthakur, learned Standing Counsel for the Forest Department.

¶2The matter pertains to grant of mining contract of the Chaprakata Hill Stone Quarry under the Aie Valley Division, Bongaigaon, for which an NIT was issued on 18.03.2017 by the DFO, Aie Valley Division, Bongaigaon. The stipulated quantity of stone was specified at 17,500 m3 and the settlement period was to be for a period of 7 years. The petitioner was one out of 7 tenderers who quoted their bids.

¶3As can be seen from the Comparative Chart made by the DFO, the Page No.# 3/5 petitioner's bid was the highest at Rs.3,65,55,555/-. The DFO thereafter made a recommendation for settlement of the stone quarry with the petitioner on

03.05.2017 to the Conservator of Forests, Lower Assam Social Forestry Circle, Bongaigaon. While the petitioner was expecting settlement of the stone quarry, the office of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (P) and Head of the Forest Force, Assam issued letter dated 19.08.2017, asking the DFO to submit justification for fixing the stipulated quantity of stones to be extracted at 17,500 m3 for 7 years, without delineating the boundary and the area, as the grant assigned per year appeared to be very low.

¶4The DFO in his clarificatory letter dated 27.10.2017 thereafter stated that the calculation of the stone materials at 17,500 m3 was on the basis that the maximum mahal materials earmarked for supply for Government works. Disregarding the above report and the quantification made by the DFO, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests issued the impugned letter dated

30.10.2017, stating that the tender process initiated by the DFO, Aie Valley Division's NIT dated 18.03.2017 was cancelled, as the annual stipulated quantity of stones was very low. The Conservator of Forests, Lower Assam Zone was thereafter requested to instruct the DFO to carry out proper assessment of the quantity of stone available in the Chaprakata Hill Stone Quarry and put the mining contract area for fresh sale, by inviting a fresh NIT after re-fixing the quantity of stone as well as the Government value/reserve price for the said mining contract area.

¶5The petitioner being aggrieved thereafter filed the present case, Page No.# 4/5 challenging the decision of the respondents in cancelling the NIT and the fresh NIT that was proposed to be issued. This Court, vide order dated 08.12.2017 thereafter passed an interim order, directing that a fresh NIT for the said stone quarry should not be issued pursuant to the impugned letter dated 30.10.2017 issued by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Assam.

¶6This Court has heard the submissions made by the counsels for the parties. However, this Court is of the view that due to efflux of time, the present case would only be of academic interest, inasmuch as, the issue with regard to settlement of the stone quarry for mining purposes is basically meant to earn revenue for the State. The NIT for settlement of the mining area was for a period of 7 years and that period has expired as on date, keeping in view that the NIT was issued on 18.03.2017 and the recommendation for settlement of the mining area had been made on 03.05.2017, which was not acceptable to the Higher Authorities.

¶7The petitioner was never settled with the mining contract and in fact the petitioner had also been asked to take back his Earnest Money as far back as on November, 2017, vide letter dated 10.11.2017 issued by the DFO.

¶8This Court is of the view that as more than 7 years have passed since the issuance of the NIT dated 18.03.2017, it would be in the interest of the Public Exchequer, if a fresh NIT is issued for settlement of the stone quarry, keeping in view the rate inflation and the fact that the price of stones is much higher now than it was in the year 2017. Accordingly, in view of the reasons stated above, Page No.# 5/5 this Court is of the view that the writ petition cannot be allowed only on account of efflux of time. This writ petition is not being decided on the basis of merit, due to the reasons stated above.

¶9Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with liberty being given to the State respondents to issue a fresh NIT for settlement of the said stone quarry. The Earnest Money of the petitioner, if not returned, shall be returned back immediately.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/5 GAHC010244662017 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/7588/2017o CHAKRAoDHARoDASo S/OoLATEoNARAYANoCH.oDAS,oVILL-oCHITKAGAON,oPO-oCHAPRAKATA,o DIST.oBONGAIGAON,oASSAM VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoando6oORS.o REP.oBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoandoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM,o FORESToDEPTT.,oDISPUR,oGUWAHATI-6 2:THEoPRINCIPALoCHIEFoCONSERVATORoOFoFORESTSP oO/OoTHEoPRINCIPALoCHIEFoCONSERVATORoOFoFORESTSoANDoHEADoOFo FORESToFORCE oASSAM oPANJABARI oGUWAHATI-781037 3:THEoPRINCIPALoCHIEFoCONSERVATORoOFoFORESTSoP oLOWERoASSAMoZONE oKACHARIGHAT oGUWAHATI-781001 4:THEoCONSERVATORoOFoFORESTS oLOWERoASSAMoSOCIALoFORESTRYoCIRCLE oBONGAIGAON oPIN-783380 5:THEoDIVISIONALoFORESToOFFICER oAIEoVALLEYoDIVISION oBONGAIGAON oPIN-783380 Page No.# 2/5 6:THE FOREST DEPOT OFFICER AIE VALLEY DIVISION BONGAIGAON PIN-783380 7:SRI ANUPAM SARMA MANAGING DIRECTOR FO ANPL-CMATPLJV BHASKAR NAGAR BY LANE NO. 2 BEHIND B.S. PUBLICATIONS ZOO NARENGI ROAD GUWAHATI-78102 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.B BORA, MR.A HASSAN,MR.G BAISHYA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPTT., GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA