IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
K. Sreedhar Rao, Prasanta Kumar Saikia, JJ.
In Re: State of Arunachal Pradesh and Ors.
W.P.(C) (Takn Up) No. 1267 of 2010
Decided On: 21.08.2015
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section 13(1)(d)(i), (ii) and (iii) - criminal misconduct - misfeasance and malfeasance - Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in particular against the respondent No. 7 who was the then Minister of Public Works Department and Urban Development, Arunachal Pradesh alleging the criminal misconduct and misfeasance and malfeasance in the capacity as PWD Minister. The request to withdraw the PIL was rejected and petitioner was fined by order in Misc. Case and the registry was directed to register the PIL as a suo motu writ petition. In paragraph 4 of the petition the acts of misconduct have been stated as under: Contract for construction of low cost housing for safai karmachari and for the people living below poverty line was awarded to one Agency at the behest of the Respondent No. 7, Mr. Nabam Tuki, the Honble Minister, PWD & UD in gross violation of the norms and procedures required to be followed in awarding such contract. It be stated herein that the said agency has no EPF license, labour license, contractor registration in CPWD or Railway, MES, NBCC etc. As required for being eligible for entering into such contract - Said Agency is owned by Smti Nabam Yani Respondent No. 8 wife of the Honble Minister i.e. Respondent No. 7 – Held, purposes of this section, "known sources of income" means income received from any lawful source and such receipt has been intimated in accordance with the provisions of any law, rules or orders for the time being applicable to a public servant - Any public servant who commits criminal misconduct shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall be not less than one year but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine - "Offences under Section 13(1)(d)(i), (ii) and (iii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 constitute distinct and different offences. The favour shown to each of the kith and kin also amounts to distinct and different offences. It is therefore directed that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register a case and conduct investigation against the alleged misconduct of the respondent No. 7 and the persons who have abetted the commission of the said offences. The CBI is directed to take the case records and the documents of this case in their custody from the Registry of this Court for the purpose of investigation - Trial judiciary in Arunachal Pradesh is at a nascent stage. The complicated case of this nature and importance cannot be handled by the trial Courts in Arunachal Pradesh. Therefore the CBI is directed to file an FIR and the Final Report before the jurisdictional Special Court at Guwahati, under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and who shall try and dispose of the case in accordance with law - Petition is allowed
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.
Pleadings.
1. One Nabam Tagam filed this Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in particular against the respondent No. 7 who was the then Minister of Public Works Department and Urban Development, Arunachal Pradesh alleging the criminal misconduct and misfeasance and malfeasance in the capacity as PWD Minister. The request to withdraw the PIL was rejected and petitioner was fined Rs. 10,000/- by order dated 16th February, 2010 in Misc. Case 347/2010 and the registry was directed to register the PIL as a suo motu writ petition. In paragraph 4 of the petition the acts of misconduct have been stated as under:
"(i) the contract for construction of low cost housing for safai karmachari and for the people living below poverty line at Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh for Rs. 3,06,06,667.74 was awarded to one M/s. N.E. Agency at the behest of the Respondent No. 7, Mr. Nabam Tuki, the Hon'ble Minister, PWD & UD in gross violation of the norms and procedures required to be followed in awarding such contract. It be stated herein that the said agency has no EPF license, labour license, contractor registration in CPWD or Railway, MES, NBCC etc. As required for being eligible for entering into such contract. The said M/s. N.E. Agency is owned by Smti Nabam Yani Respondent No. 8 wife of the Hon'ble Minister i.e. Respondent No. 7 as mentioned above.
It may be mentioned herein that the petitioner has obtained from RU-01 containing Certificate of Registration issued under the Arunachal Pradesh Goods Act, 2005, in respect of M/s. N.E. Agency wherein though the name of the proprietor is not mentioned but the photograph pasted in the said form is of Smti Naban Yani wife of Mr. Nabam Tuki, Minister and the petitioner recognizes the said photograph of Mr. Nabam Yani.
(ii) The aforesaid agency, namely, M/s. N.E. Agency owned by Smti Nabam Yani wife of the Hon'ble Mr. Nabam Tuki was further awarded with another contract for construction of staff quarters for KV Rohtak for Rs. 53,28,038 at the behest of Hon'ble Minister Mr. Nabam Tuki, Respondent No. 7 vide letter dated 15.12.05. The said contract was again awarded without following any norms and procedures.
(iii) The contract of House Keeping & Catering Service of newly constructed Arunachal House at the Chanakya Puri, New Delhi was awarded to an agency namely, M/s. Jumsi Enterprise, owned by Smti Nabam Aka, Respondent No. 10, who is the sister-in-law of Nabam Tuki Hon'ble Minister (PWD & UD), Arunachal Pradesh, at the instance of the Hon'ble Minister, Mr. Nabam Tuki, the value of which runs into crores of rupees. The said contract was allotted vide U.O. No. MPWD-13/2004-05, dtd. 16.11.05 without following any norms for awarding such contract.
(iv) The contract for construction/raising boundary wall at Kendriya Vidlaya at Salt Lake, Kolkata for Rs. 13,81,093/- lacs vide letter No. SECC/Cont-2(A)/2005-06/3478, dtd. 15/12/- 5 without floating the required NIT was awarded to M/s. Jusmi Enterprise. The said agency as mentioned above is owned by Sri Naba Aka sister-in-law of Hon'ble Minister (PWD & UD), Arunachal Pradesh the Respondent No. 7 by totally violating the required procedure for awarding contract on non-competitive amount.
The petitioner respectfully states that Kendriya Vidalaya Sangathan appears to have entrusted 'the construction job of its organization to PWD, Itanagar and the PWD, Itanagar is allotting construction works of Kendriya Vidyalaya from Shillong to Calcutta and Rohtak in Harayana at will. Some of these works have also been awarded at the behest of Minister of his relatives which are as follows.
(v) The contract for construction of Regional Office Building for Kendriya Vidalaya Sangathan at Salt Lake, Kolkata for Rs. 26,90,913/- was awarded to an agency, namely, M/s. Engineers Cooperative Society Ltd. It may be stated herein that inspite of best efforts on the part of the petitioner, the said firm could not be located in the State of Arunachal Pradesh. However, accordin
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.