Back
2017 Supreme(Gau) 1024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
AJIT SINGH, MANOJIT BHUYAN, JJ.
XXXXXXXXX - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) (Taken Up) No.1267 of 2010
Decided On :16-11-2017
Subject
Corruption - Public Works Contracts
Act Referred
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.14
PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT : S.13(1)(d)(i)(ii)(iii)
Headnote
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 –Section 13 –Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945 – Section 38 – Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945 –Central Bureau of Investigation –General Secretary – Contractors’ Welfare Association – Illegally Awarding – Seeking Investigation – Allegations – Petition was thus registered as Taken Up case followed with an appointment of Amicus Curiae record reveals that it was then heard on different dates on some administrative issues, members of Bar resolved to abstain from appearing in Courts resolution did not go well with the Bench and vide judgment and order Division Bench decided the case on merits directing Central Bureau of Investigation to register offences against Respondent No.7 and persons who have abetted commission of said offences – Division Bench also directed that after investigation final report be submitted by Central Bureau of Investigation before Special Court at Guwahati which shall try and dispose of case in accordance with law – Aggrieved Respondent No.7 challenged judgment and order by filing Civil Appeal before Supreme Court on ground that he was not given proper opportunity of hearing – Held, Contract works were awarded to them when Respondent No.7 was a Minister of Public Works Department and Urban Development in the State of Arunachal Pradesh allegations therefore require thorough probe by an independent agency – Since State Government has defended the awarding of contracts in question, we are of view that State police will not be in a position to investigate allegations fairly more particularly when high officials and former Minister are involved – We accordingly direct Central Bureau of Investigation to have preliminary enquiry and in case the allegations are found having some substance warranting further proceeding with criminal prosecution, may proceed in accordance with law – Our this direction is in consonance with the similar direction given by the Supreme Court in Noida Entrepreneurs Association – Petition is finally disposed.
For the Petitioner: Mr. S Banik, learned Amicus Curiae, assisted by Mr. AH Laskar and Mr. MK Rongpi, learned counsel.
For the Respondents:Mr. N Dutta, learned Advocate General, Arunachal Pradesh, assisted by Mr. S Saikia and Mr. BD Goswami, learned Additional Advocates General, Arunachal Pradesh and Mr. NNB Choudhury, learned Senior Government Advocate, Arunachal Pradesh, Mr. P Pathak, learned senior counsel, Mr. AK Bhattacharyya, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. D Bhattacharyya, learned counsel, Mrs. Suparna Nag, learned counsel, Mr. AC Borbora, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. MG Singh, learned counsel, Ms. M Dev, learned counsel
Ajit Singh, J.
Originally PIL No.76/2006 was filed by one Nabam Tagam seeking investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation against Respondent No.7–Nabam Tuki, the then Minister of Public Works Department and Urban Development in the State of Arunachal Pradesh for illegally awarding contract works to his kith and kin. Surprisingly, later, Nabam Tagam made a request for withdrawal of the Public Interest Litigation, but the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.2.2010 rejected the prayer with fine of Rs.10,000/- and direction to register the same as Suo Motu Writ Petition. The petition was thus registered as Taken Up case followed with an appointment of Amicus Curiae. The record reveals that it was then heard on different dates. However, on some administrative issues, the members of the Bar resolved to abstain from appearing in Courts. The resolution did not go well with the Bench and vide judgment and order dated 21.8.2015, the Division Bench decided the case on merits directing the Central Bureau of Investigation to register offences under Section 13(1)(d)(i)(ii) and (iii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against Respondent No.7 and persons who have abetted the commission of the said offences. The Division Bench also directed that after investigation final report be submitted by the Central Bureau of Investigation before the Special Court at Guwahati which shall try and dispose of the case in accordance with law. Aggrieved, Respondent No.7 challenged the judgment and order dated 21.8.2015 by filing Civil Appeal Nos.1522-1523 of 2017 before the Supreme Court on the ground that he was not given proper opportunity of hearing. The Supreme Court agreed with Respondent No.7 and vide order dated 6.2.2017 set aside the judgment and order dated 21.8.2015 with a direction that case be decided afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned. It is in this background, the case has been placed before us for a fresh decision and we have heard respective counsel for the parties in detail.
2. The facts in short are these. During the relevant period in 2005 and 2006, Respondent No.7 was the Minister of Public Works Department and Urban Development in the State of Arunachal Pradesh. Respondent No.9 is his wife and also the Proprietor of M/s NE Agency. Likewise, Respondent No.10 is sister-in-law of Respondent No.7 and wife of Respondent No.11. Respondent No.10 is also the Proprietor of M/s Jumsi Aqua Pure (Industry), M/s Engineering Co-operation Society and M/s JCA Construction whereas Respondent No.11 is Proprietor of M/s Assam Arunachal Agency and M/s Delhi Traders. Also Respondent No.8 is another sister-in-law of Respondent No.7 and she is the owner of M/s Marry Associates and Respondent No.12 is the owner of Durga Motors who is the younger brother of sister-in-law of Respondent No.7.
3. The allegations in the writ petition pertains to following contract works awarded by Respondent No.7 to his kith and kin for selfish wrongful gain without following the norms and inviting tenders:-
(i) Construction work of low cost housing for Safai Karmachari and for people living below poverty line at Itanagar for Rs.3,06,06,667.74/- to M/s NE Agency owned by Respondent No.9, wife of Respondent No.7.
(ii) Construction work of Staff Quarters for Kendriya Vidyalaya, Rohtak for Rs.53,28,038/- to M/s NE Agency owned by Respondent No.9, wife of Respondent No.7.
(iii) Contract work of House Keeping & Catering Service of Arunachal House at Chanakya Puri, New Delhi awarded to M/s Jhumsi Enterprise owned by Respondent No.10, sister-in-law of Respondent No.7.
(iv) Construction work for raising boundary wall at Kendriya Vidyalaya, Salt Lake, Kolkata for Rs.13,81,093/- to M/s Jhumsi Enterprise owned by Respondent No.10, sister-in-law of Respondent No.7.
(v) Construction work of Regional Office Building of Kendriya Vidyalaya, Salt Lake, Kolkata to M/s Engineers Co-operative Society Ltd. which was accepted by Respondent
