Tender bids can be lawfully rejected for not meeting specified conditions in the NIT, and 'neighbourhood' must be understood distinctly from 'area of operation' in the context of fishery settlements.

JUDGMENT :

(ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY, J.)

1. Heard Mr. I. Chowdhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Biswakarma, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No. 3079/2022 and in WP(C) No. 6026/2022, and Mr. A. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No. 2744/2022. Also heard Ms. U. Das, learned State counsel representing the State respondents and Ms. M. Devi, learned counsel for the private respondent in all the writ petitions, in whose favour, the settlement dated 07.04.2022 was made, pursuant to an NIT.

2. These three writ petitions are taken up together for final disposal, as agreed by the contesting parties, more particularly, for the reason that the subject matters of these three writ petitions relate to challenge to the order of settlement dated 07.04.2022,whereby, Karha Part-II Fishery in Dhakuakhana Sub-Division in the district of Lakhimpur was settled in favour of the private respondent i.e. M/s Karha Fishery Samabai Samity Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as M/s Karha). Such settlement order was issued under the signature of the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Fishery Department.

3. The offer of the petitioner in WP(C) No. 3079/2022, i.e. M/s ParghatKaibarta Min Silpa Samabai Samity Ltd, (hereinafter referred to as M/s Parghat) was rejected, primarily on the ground that the Experience Certificate submitted by M/s Parghat in terms of the NIT dated 20.11.2021 is not acceptable, as the said certificate does not disclose the experience of the society in fishing.

4. The said settlement order dated 07.04.2022 is challenged by Karhapariya Anchalik Koibarta Surakhya Samity (hereinafter referred to as M/s Karhapariya), in WP(C)/2744/2022.The bid of M/s Karhapariya was rejected, primarily on the ground that the society did not submit 100% actual fisherman certificate from the competent authority and it submitted audited accounts only for the year 2021, but not for 3 years as required under the condition of the NIT dated 20.11.2021 and also that the security deposit has been made in the name of an individual not in the name of the society.

5. WP(C) No. 6026/2022 is filed by M/s Parghatassailing an order dated 28.07.2022, whereby the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dhakuakhana, submitted a report as per the direction of the Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur, as regards the genuineness of the Neighbourhood Certificate of M/s Karha, such an enquiry was conducted based on the complaints lodged by M/s Karhapariya and M/s Parghat before the Minister of Fisheries, raising dispute that M/s Karha is not situated within the neighbourhood of Karha Part-II Fishery.

6. The brief facts, which are necessary for the determination of the present writ petitions,are recorded hereinbelow as under:

I. There was a dispute regarding the cancellation of certificate of M/S Karha fishery and the amalgamation of said fishery with M/s Parghat. The dispute went upto the Hon’ble Apex Court and the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 1674-75 of 1999,while deciding the issue, recorded the following decisions and issued certain directions:-

A. M/s Parghat was registered in the year 1971, and pursuant to a Government policy decision, said M/s Parghat was amalgamated with M/s KarhaSociety, being a new society, which was formed out of PuttikhatiSociety. Thus, the new society, namely, M/s Karha society, came to be registered in the year 1978.

B. At that relevant point of time, the Karha society was having a lease in its favour in respect of certain areas, which were formerly within the areas of operation of M/s Parghat.

C. An order dated 24.10.1996 was passed by the authorities in the State,