JUDGEMENT AND ORDER :

Heard Mr. H. K. Mahanta, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. B. Sarma, learned Standing counsel, Assam Fisheries Development Corporation, appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2, and Mr. B. Gogoi, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 3.

2. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner calls into question the order dated 16.11.2015, passed by the Managing director, Assam Fisheries Development Corporation (for short, ‘AFDC’), cancelling the order of settlement, dated 18.09.2015, settling No. 37 Fulbari Anuwa Fishery (for short, ‘fishery’) in favour of the petitioner, and settling the same in favour of respondent No. 3 herein for 7 years with effect from the revenue year 2015-2016 to 2021-2022 at Rs. 10,46,001/- yearly.

3. A Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) dated 10.08.2015 was issued by the Managing Director, AFDC, for settlement of the fishery. Four tenderers, including the petitioner and respondent No. 3, had submitted their tenders. While respondent No. 3 emerged as the highest tenderer, the petitioner was the second highest tenderer. However, as noted earlier, order of settlement of the fishery was issued in favour of the present petitioner.

4. Being aggrieved, respondent No. 3 approached this Court by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which was registered as WP(C) 5947/2015. The order of settlement dated 18.09.2015, made in favour of the petitioner, which is available in the records produced by Mr. S. B. Sarma, goes to show that the tender of respondent No. 3 was not considered as the Non-Bakijai Certificate (Bakijai Clearance Certificate - a certificate showing that there is no arrears of payment of revenue) submitted by him had some defects and, therefore, settlement was offered to the petitioner at his bid amount of Rs. 9,51,000/- holding that the defect in his bid, namely, his photograph being not attested, is not significant.

5. Clause 4.1.7 of the NIT dated 10.08.2015, amongst others, required the tenderers to submit “Non-Bakijai Certificate” from the office of the Deputy Commissioner concerned.

6. The aforesaid writ petition, namely, WP(C) 5947/2015, filed by respondent No. 3 was disposed of by this Court by an order dated 04.11.2015. Perusal of the order of this Court dated 04.11.2015 goes to show that the Non-Bakijai Certificate submitted by the present respondent No. 3 (petitioner therein) did not indicate the period for which it was applicable and the same was also not attested. It also goes to show that by means of an affidavit, the respondent No. 3 herein (petitioner therein) had brought on record a certificate, as corrected by the competent authority, indicating the period for which the certificate was applicable. Objection was raised by the learned counsel for the present petitioner as well as by Mr. Sarma, learned Standing counsel, AFDC, contending that the said corrected certificate could not have been taken into consideration as the last date of opening of tender had since expired on 28.08.2015. At that stage, it appears from the said order, that a prayer was made by the learned counsel for the petitioner therein (respondent No. 3 herein) that he be allowed to make a representation before the competent authority highlighting his grievance in respect of the Non-Bakijai Certificate. On the aforesaid submission, this Court disposed of the writ petition in the following terms:

“At this stage Mr. B. Gogoi, learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that he be allowed to make representation before the competent authority i.e. the Assam Fisheries Development Corporation highlighting his grievances in respect of the Non-Bakijai Certificate. The said prayer made by the petitioner appears to be reasonable.

Without expressing anything on the merit of the case, this writ petition is disposed of allowing the petitioner to make a representation before the Assam Fisheries Development Corporatio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document