Point of Law: Process of settlement resulting into the order of settlement in favour of the respondent no. 6 is found to be vitiated one due to taking into account irrelevant factors in the decision making process and non-compliance of the statutory prescription contained in Rule 47(10) of the Rules, 2002 and the same is liable to be set aside.

JUDGMENT :

MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.

1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner assailing the action on the part of the Golaghat Zilla Parishad in settling Sapjuri Weekly Market in favour of the respondent no. 6 inter-alia on the grounds that the bid of the petitioner was found to be a valid and higher one than that of the respondent no. 6 and there was infraction of Rule 47(10) of the Assam Panchayat (Financial) Rules, 2002 on the part of the General Standing Committee of Golaghat Zilla Parishad in granting the settlement.

2. The facts which are necessary for adjudication of the issue raised in this writ petition can be exposited, in brief, as follows:

2.1 A Tender Notice dated 06.05.2021 for settlement of markets/ghats/meen mahals (‘Tender Notice’ for short) was published by the Golaghat West Anchalik Panchayat, Bokakhat inviting sealed bids from intending bidders for settlement of a number of markets/ghats/meen mahals. By the said Tender Notice, a total of 14 nos. of markets within the Anchalik Panchayat were sought to be settled. One such market was Sapjuri Weekly Market within the territorial jurisdiction of Northeast Kaziranga Gaon Panchayat. As per the Tender Notice, the Government value of the said market was fixed at Rs. 60,638/- and the last date of submission of bids was initially fixed on 07.06.2021. The last date of submission of bids was, however, extended twice at later points of time. As per the second extension, the last date of submission of bids was 21.06.2021.

2.2 It is an admitted position, as revealed from the records of settlement, that in response to the Tender Notice for settlement of Sapjuri Weekly Market, a total of 11 nos. of bids were received from the bidders quoting different bid values. The bid values, in descending order, quoted by the 11 nos. of bidders were as under:

2.3 When the respondent no. 4 issued an order of settlement dated 20.07.2021 settling Sapjuri Weekly Market in favour of the respondent no. 6 at his offered bid value of Rs. 15,00,000/- the petitioner has approached this Court by this writ petition challenging the said action of the respondent authorities in settling the market in favour of the respondent no. 6.

3. Heard Mr. B.D. Das, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. D Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. A. Roy, learned Standing Counsel, Panchayat and Rural Development [P&RD] Department for the respondent nos. 1-5 and Mr. B.P. Bora, learned counsel for the respondent no. 6.

4. Mr. Das, learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the bid of the petitioner was found to be a valid and higher one by the General Standing Committee of Golaghat Zilla Parishad. Amongst the 11 nos. of bidders, the bid of the petitioner was found to be the second highest bid whereas the bid of the respondent no. 6 was found to be the third highest bid. The main contention of Mr. Das is that if the General Standing Committee decides to settle a market in favour of a bidder despite presence of higher valid bids, then such acceptance would require prior and formal approval from the State Government. He has submitted that Rule 47(10) of the Assam Panchayat (Financial) Rules, 2002 (‘the Rules, 2002’ for short) has stipulated that the tender of the highest bidder shall have to be