SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Gau) 2081

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Devashis Baruah, J.
Nitul Boruah, S/O Dharmeswar Boruah - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Assam Represented By The Commissioner And Secretary To The Government Of Assam, Forest And Department And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) 3353 of 2025
Decided On : 09-12-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. D. Baruah, Advocate, Mr. P.K. Bordoloi, Advocate, Mr. P. Handique, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. B. Gogoi, Addl. A.G. Mr. R.R. Gogoi, Standing Counsel

Tender cancellations must comply with established guidelines to prevent arbitrary actions violating fair procurement principles.

Headnote:(A) Assam Public Procurement Act, 2017 - Assam Public Procurement Rules, 2020 - Cancellation of tender - Writ petition challenging Cancellation Corrigendum dated 19.05.2025 for construction work - Notice Inviting Tender stated open competitive bidding and obligations under procurement laws must be adhered to - Cancellation was arbitrary as bid was below estimated cost, not addressed per acceptable guidelines stipulated in Rule 30(5) of the Rules of 2020; tender process violated principles of reasonableness and transparency. (Paras 4, 27, 29)

(B) Administrative Discretion - Principle of non-arbitrariness in state action - Cancellation of tenders must adhere to guidelines without imposing arbitrary restrictions. (Paras 27, 28)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner submitted the lowest bid of Rs. 38,51,999.99 for a tender with estimated cost of Rs. 46,98,000/-. The tender was cancelled without reason, relying on a directive that limits bids beyond ±10% of estimated costs, which was not specified in the tender notice.

Findings of Court:
The court found the cancellation arbitrary and void, instructing the respondents to reassess bids according to the established procurement guidelines.

Issues: Whether the cancellation of the tender was justified under the applicable laws and guidelines.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the cancellation of the tender lacked support under procurement rules and could not justify the rejection based on an undisclosed criterion.

Result: Writ petition allowed; Cancellation Corrigendum quashed and directed reevaluation of bids.

JUDGMENT :

Devashis Baruah, J.

Heard Mr. D. Baruah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. R.R. Gogoi, the learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of all the respondents. I have also heard Mr. B. Gogoi, the learned Additional Advocate General, Assam who is also the Standing Counsel for the Finance Department, Government of Assam.

2. The petitioner herein has approached this Court being aggrieved by the Cancellation Corrigendum dated 19.05.2025 (hereinafter referred to as, “the impugned Cancellation Corrigendum”) issued by the respondent No. 4 and further seeking appropriate directions upon the respondents to issue the work order in favour of the petitioner in respect to the work of “Construction of Range Office-cum-Range Office Quarter, Garamur”.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

3. The Divisional Forest Officer, Majuli (T) Division, Garamur issued a Notice Inviting Tender dated 18.01.2025 inviting bids from eligible bidders for construction of Range Office-cum-Range Office Quarter, Garamur as well as for RCC building (Forest Guard/ Game Watcher/Grade-IV Quarter and Anti-poaching Camp).

4. The present writ petition relates to construction of Range Office- cum-Range Office Quarter, Garamur wherein the estimated cost was mentioned in the Notice Inviting Tender at Rs. 46,98,000/-. It is specifically mentioned in the said Notice Inviting Tender and, more particularly, at Clause 2 of Section I that the bidding would be conducted through Open Competitive Bidding method and the procedures as specified in “ The Assam Public Procurement Act, 2017” (for short, “the Act of 2017”) and “The Assam Public Procurement Rules, 2021” would be followed.

5. The petitioner along with various other bidders participated in the said tender process for the construction of Range Office-cum-Range Office Quarter, Garamur. All the 6 (six) bidders including the petitioner were found to be technically responsive. The petitioner's bid was the lowest having quoted an amount of Rs. 38,51,999.99/-. This was duly intimated to all concerned in the E-Portal of Assam Tenders dated 29.03.2025. The petitioner thereupon waited that the work order would be issued to the petitioner. However, to the surprise of the petitioner, on 19.05.2025, the tender process in respect to the construction of Range Office-cum-Range Office Quarter, Garamur as well as the tender for construction of Ground Floor with provision of three storied RCC building, Forest guard, Game Watcher, Grade-IV Quarter and other quarter were cancelled. There were no reasons provided for issuance of the impugned Cancellation Corrigendum and the petitioner therefore being aggrieved had approached this Court challenging the impugned Cancellation Corrigendum by filing the present writ petition seeking the reliefs as already aforestated.

6. It is seen that this Court vide an order dated 23.06.2025 passed an interim order thereby restraining the respondents from issuing a fresh tender in respect to the tender in question.

7. The records reveal that this Court issued notice on 22.07.2025. On the said date, when the matter was taken up, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court a Notification dated 30.07.2024 issued by the Finance (Establishment-B) Department, Government of Assam in exercise of powers under Rule 30(5) of the Assam Public Procurement Rules, 2020 (for short, “the Rules of 2020”) whereby it is stipulated as to what steps are required to be taken if the bid value is below 10% to the estimated cost of the project.

8. The record further reveals that an affidavit-in-opposition has been filed by the respondent No. 4. From a perusal of the said affidavit-in-opposition, it is revealed that on the basis of a communication issued dated 10.05.2023 by the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Executive Officer, State CAMPA whereby it is mentioned that the limit for financial bid value shall be between minus (-) 10% to plus (+)10% of









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top