Back
MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
Abdul Barek Son Of Late Kolim Uddin – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
1. Heard Mr. J. Abedin, learned counsel for the petitioners in all the three writ petitions. Also heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel for the P&RD Department and Ms. U. Das, learned Addl. Sr. Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No.2 in all the cases. Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, learned counsel appears for the respondent No.8 in all the three writ petitions.
2. The grievance of the petitioners are that they had not been able to submit their bids pursuant to the tender notice dated 11.04.2023 issued by the Bechimari Anchalik Panchayat for settlement of the (1) Lalpool Weekly Cattle Market (hereinafter referred to as the ‘market’) (2) Bechimari Weekly Cattle Market (hereinafter referred to as the ‘cattle market’) and (3) Bechimari Daily Vegetable Market (hereinafter referred to as the ‘vegetable market’) for the settlement period from 01.07.2023 to 30.06.2024.
The Lalpool Weekly Cattle Market pertains to WP(C) No.4293/2023, while the Bechimari Weekly Cattle Market relates to WP(C) No.4312/2023. The Bechimari Daily Vegetable Market pertains to WP(C) No.4309/2023.
3. The above 3 markets have been settled with the respondent No.8 of the concerned writ petitions. The prayer of th
The court emphasized the need for a fair enquiry into the low settlement rates and the possibility of connivance, and the initiation of proper action if mischief was found.
Point of Law : When a bidder gets an order by suppression or concealment of material facts and the tendering authority despite having knowledge of the fact that the bidder has adopted a practice whic....
Acceptance of a lesser bid may be permissible but in case of settlement of a market under the aegis of the Anchalik Panchayat and/or Zilla Parishad, the same is ordinarily required to be settled in f....
Fairness demanded that the tendering authority should have disclosed to all the tenderers beforehand that the bid value above a particular amount or above a particular percentage of the scheduled rat....
Point of Law : Process of settlement resulting into the order of settlement in favour of the respondent no. 9 is found to be arbitrary and irrational one.
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....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
