Executive instructions cannot override statutory rules, and financial prudence should be considered in awarding contracts for long periods.

JUDGMENT :

Vipin Sanghi, J.

We have heard learned counsels and proceed to dispose of this writ petition.

2. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to seek the following reliefs:-

“(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, calling for the original record and pleased to quash the impugned tender notice no.6130/Jalasaya/ 2021-22 Dehradun dated 18th November 2021 (Annexure-1) along with corrigendum dated 02nd December 2021 (Annexure-2) issued by the respondent no.2 i.e. Secretary Uttarakhand State Matasaya Palak Vikas Abhikaran Dehradun.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing and commanding the respondent fisheries board to the effect that it shall issue fresh tender notice in respect to Baur & Haripura Reservoir situated in District Udham Singh Nagar for awarding fishing contract for next 05 years only in accordance with the Uttarakhand State Water Management, Fisheries and Angling Rules 2013”

3. The case of the petitioner is that respondent no.2 issued the impugned tender Notice No. 6130/Jalasaya/ 2021- 22 Dehradun dated 18th November 2021, to which a corrigendum was issued on 02nd December 2021. The said tender invited bid from the interested bidders for providing fishing rights at Baur & Haripura Reservoir in District Udham Singh Nagar. The tenure of the contract was stated to be for ten years, i.e. from 2021-22 to 2030-31. The tabulation contained in the tender, which, inter alia, described the period of tender reads as follows:-

4. The petitioner was aggrieved by the said tender on the ground that the tenure of the contract under the tender, which was stated to be ten years, was contrary to the rules framed by the State Government under the Uttarakhand Fisheries Act, 2003. The said Act, in Section 3(1), empowers the State Government to make the Rules for the purposes mentioned in the said Act. In pursuance of Section 3(1) of the Act, the State Government has framed the Uttarakhand Fisheries Rules, 2013, on 25.10.2013. Rule 11 of the said Rules, inter alia, reads as follows:-

^^11- eSnkuh {ks= dh ufn;ksa ds Bsdksa dh vof/k ik¡p o"kZ gksxh vkSj bldh x.kuk vkxkeh 1 tqykbZ ls 30 twu rd dh vof/k dks lfEefyr dj dh tk;sxhA ÁFke o"kZ esa ;g vof/k Lohd`fr dh rkjh[k ls ÁkjEHk ,oa 30 twu dks lekIr le>h tk;sxhA Lohd`r fufonk ewY; esa Áfro"kZ 10 Áfr'kr dh o`f) vkxf.kr dh tk;sxh vkSj rnuqlkj fufonknkrk }kjk lans; gksxhA**

(emphasis supplied)

5. In the same Rules, Appendix 6(1) again reiterates the same position in the following words:-

6. Upon issuance of notices, respondent no.1 and respondent nos.2 to 4 have filed their counter-affidavits. The stand taken by the State in their counter-affidavit is that, the State had issued a Government Order on 18.11.2021- which also happens to be a date on which the tender, in question, was issued, thereby fixing the tenure of government contracts for fishing rights as ten years. Clause 25 of