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
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

Tender cancellations must comply with established guidelines to prevent arbitrary actions violating fair procurement principles.
The cancellation of a tender process before technical evaluation does not confer vested rights to bidders, and adherence to procurement laws is mandatory in future processes.
Court exercising powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India has jurisdiction to examine decision making process without even going into merits of such decision.
The cancellation of a tender process must be based on valid reasons and cannot be arbitrary or illegal. Supply orders issued as a result of the tender process should be respected unless legally chall....
The procuring entity has the discretion to cancel tenders and re-invite bids without prior communication of reasons; judicial review is limited to assessing arbitrariness or statutory violations in p....
Point of Law : Petitioner is not entitled to seek a direction to the respondent authorities to settle the Mining contract Area no. 1 in his favour just because he was the lone bidder and had emerged ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.