JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)

1. Heard Mr. D. K. Sarmah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Y. Doloi, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 as well as Mr. I. Choudhury, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.4.

2. In this writ petition the decision to grant settlement of the “Gr. No.15/101- Torsa River Fishery” of Dhubri district in favour of the respondent No.4, as conveyed by communication dated 22.01.2016 issued by the respondent No.2, has been put under challenge.

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that on 27.05.2015 the respondent No.3 had issued an NIT inviting tenders from the interested Fishermen Cooperative Societies/Self Help Groups and NGOs comprising of 100% actual fishermen of the Scheduled Caste (SC) community or Maimal community of the Barak Valley for awarding the settlement of the aforementioned fishery for a period of seven years. As per the NIT, the tender papers would be accepted till 2.00 p.m. on 26.06.2015 and the bids would be opened on the same day at 3.00 p.m.

4. A four member Fishery Advisory Committee headed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Fishery), Dhubri was constituted for the purpose of evaluation of the tenders. The Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Dhubri; the DFDO, Dhubri and Sri Ramesh Das, in his capacity as a member from the scheduled caste community (fishermen), were the other members in the said Committee.

4. In total, four tenders were received. The petitioner society became the second highest bidder by quoting the price of Rs.9,10,000/- whereas the respondent No.4 had emerged as the highest bidder by offering an amount of Rs.18,24,025/-. The bids submitted by the other two bidders were found to be technically defective and hence, rejected.

5. The case of the writ petitioner is that in the minutes of the Fishery Advisory Committee meeting dated 26.06.2015 it has been categorically observed that the Bakijai Clearance Certificate dated 23.03.2015 enclosed by the respondent No.4 had lapsed and since the list of members of the society enclosed with the tender paper was not approved by the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies (ARCS), Dhubri, hence, the tender of the respondent No.4 was liable to be rejected. Notwithstanding the same, the respondent No.3 had issued a communication dated 05.12.2015 addressed to the respondent No.1 depicting that the bid of the respondent No.4 was valid. Taking note of such illegal projection made in the communication dated 05.12.2015 the impugned decision to issue the order of settlement had been taken in favour of the respondent No.4. According to the petitioner, as per the minutes of the Advisory Committee dated 2606-2015 the bid submitted by the writ petitioner was the only technically valid bid and therefore, the settlement ought to have been awarded in favour of the writ petitioner.

6. The respondent No.1 has filed counter affidavit, sworn by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Fisheries Department, inter-alia, stating that on the basis of a communication issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri, the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri had conducted an enquiry and thereafter, submitted a report vide letter dated 18.11.2015 informing that there was no Bakijai proceeding pending against the respondent No.4 i.e. M/s Dhubri Disabled Men Jhagra Dohar and Soulmari Beel Fishery Development Cooperative Society Ltd. It has further been stated that the members list of the respondent no. 4 society enclosed with the tender paper was found to be counter signed by the ARCS, Dhubri. It has further been mentioned that the respondent No.4 had also submitted documents such as Neighbourhood Certificate and Fishing Experience, Actual Fishermen Certificate, Registration Certificate of the Society, Audited balance sheet of the society as well as the resolution of the Board for submission of tender on behalf of the society. Considering the fact that

Click Here to Read the rest of this document