The authority can reject a valid tender if unsatisfied with the bid, prioritizing revenue considerations, and the decision to re-tender is not arbitrary.

ORDER :

Michael Zothankhuma, J.

1. Heard Mr. B.D. Konwar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. P. Doley, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.N. Goswami, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam for the respondents.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved with the decision of the respondent authorities in deciding to re-tender the grant of IMFL Retail Off Licence in Demow, Ward No. 6 (SIV-1), wherein the petitioner was the sole valid tenderer, on the ground that acceptance of the petitioner's bid amount would result in very low revenue collection to the Government.

3. The petitioner's case is that in pursuance to a Notice Inviting e-Bid (NIB) dated 09.12.2023 for grant of IMFL Retail Off Licence in three urban locations in Sivasagar District, i.e. (1) Demow, Ward No. 6 (SIV-1); (2) KPM Chariali, Sivasagar town (SIV-2) and (3) Simalguri town (SIV-3), the petitioner, who was the lone bidder, submitted his Bid for the Demow, Ward No. 6 (SIV-I).

4. The petitioner's case is that he was he only tenderer for Demow, Ward No. 6 (SIV-I), wherein the base bid/minimum bid was fixed at Rs. 2.00 lakhs. The base/minimum bid was fixed by the respondents, as per the licence fee payable by the IMFL Retail Off Licence holder for urban areas. The petitioner having submitted his Bid amount of Rs. 2.50 lakhs, the petitioner should have been given the IMFL Retail Off Licence for opening the wine shop. However, vide impugned the letter dated 13.02.2021, the State respondents have decided to re-tender the IMFL Retail Off Licence for Demow, Ward No. 6 (SIV-I), on the ground that the petitioner's bid amount would result in very low revenue collection for the Government, when compared with the other bids submitted in respect of the two other locations, inasmuch as, for KPM Chariali, Sivasagar town (SIV-2) the selected bidder had submitted a bid for Rs. 31,01,100/-, while in respect of Simalguri town (SIV-3) it was Rs. 50,05,000/-The petitioner's grievance is that as his bid is valid in terms of the NIB, the petitioner should be given the IMFL Retail Off Licence.

5. Mr. P.N. Goswami, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, on the other hand submits that the Assam Excise Rules, 2016 has been amended by way of the Assam Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as "the 2023 Amendment"). In terms of the 2023 Amendment, after Rule 114, a new Rule, i.e.,114A has been inserted. Rule 114A(1)(xiv) provides that where there is only one tenderer for a shop, the Licencing Authority can accept the offer of the sole tenderer with the previous approval of the State Government. However, the Proviso to the said Rule 114A(1)(xiv) provides that the Licencing Authority can reject the application after recording reasons, if not satisfied with the bid submitted by a bidder. Mr. P.N. Goswami submits that the bids offered in respect of the other two locations were very high, while the low bid of the petitioner from the location in which the petitioner had participated was not satisfactory to the Licencing Authority, as it would lead to low revenue collection. As such, the respondents had decided to re-tender the said IMFL Retail Off Licence in Demow, Ward No. 6 (SIV-1), to enable more bidders to enter the fray, with the Government objective to collect more revenue.

6. Mr. P.N. Goswami, learned Additional Advocate General submits that as the respondents have the right to reject any bid, including a lone valid bid for reasons to be recorded in terms of the 2023 Amendment, there was no infirmity in the respondents taking a decision to re-tender the said IMFL Retail Off Licence which was in the interest of the public exchequer. He also submits that the petitioner has no fundamental right to trade or do business in liquor. In support of his submission, the learned counsel has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Khoday Distilleries Ltd. & Others vs. State of Karnataka & Others, reported in 1994:INSC:466 : (1995) 1 SCC 574.

7. I have heard