Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Hementa Kumar Nath Son Of Banamali Nath – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam Reresented By The Principal Secretary To The Govt Of Assam – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. tender settlement dispute regarding balisatra market. (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. petitioners' challenge based on tender interpretation. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. defendants argue lack of standing for petitioners. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. court's interpretation of tender terms and rules. (Para 12 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. writ petition dismissed due to lack of merit. (Para 20) |
JUDGMENT :
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Heard Mr. KN Choudhury, the learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Ms. RR Kakati, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Ms. N Bora, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the P & RD Department and Mr. Surajit Dutta, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. DA Kaiyyum, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the private respondent No.5.
2. The petitioners herein are aggrieved by the settlement made in respect of Balisatra Half weekly market dated 22.09.2025 in favour of the respondent No.5 at an amount of Rs.66,23,866/- on the ground that the rate at which the respondent No.5 have been granted the settlement is contrary to Clause 12 of the Tender Notice dated 07.06.2025 and the continuation Notice dated 16.06.2025.
3. Taking into account that the dispute invol
The court ruled that no lowest rate for bids is mandated by applicable rules, allowing a tender to be settled below the three-year average.
A bid submitted above the permissible limit set by tender requirements is invalid if it fails to comply with mandatory documentation requirements.
Point of Law : Court should always keep the larger public interest in mind in order to decide whether its intervention is called for or not and it is only when it comes to a conclusion that overwhelm....
A party cannot challenge the validity of a clause in the middle of the selection proceedings if they did not challenge it earlier.
Failure to challenge a clause in the tender notice during the selection process precludes a party from challenging it later.
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....
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.
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
