17.04.2025 Sl. No.1 (JP)

Ali Ct. No.24 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION WPA 872 of 2025 Vishma Dev Adhikary Versus State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Debabrata Saha Roy, Sr. Adv., Ms. N. Pal Mr. Ananda Gopal Mukherjee, Ms. Sonam Roy …… for the petitioner. Mr. Suman Sengupta, Mr. D.Basu Mollick ………..for the State.

The petitioner applied for FPS licence in terms of Notification issued by the Sub Divisional Controller, Food and Supplies, Mekligang vide memo No. 20/SCF&S/MKG/2024 dated 8^th January, 2024. Petitioner applied for the licence by making specific application. His proposed shop-cum- godown was inspected by the concerned authority on 17^th May, 2024.

It is the contention of the petitioner that suddenly by an advice/order of Additional District Magistrate (G) concerned, the SCFS, Mekligang form a committee for further enquiry over the proposed shop-cum-godown of the petitioner as well as other applicants. However, the interview was conducted on 6^th of February, 2025. Thereafter, the candidature of the petitioner was rejected.

It is the case of the petitioner that he is this most suitable candidate but the private respondent was selected for the said vacancy though the private respondent has not fulfilled eligible criteria as per the vacancy notification.

It is the firm contention of the petitioner that the proposed shop-cum-godown of the private respondent was constructed over Plot No. 1003 of Mouza-Soulmari under District Cooch Behar. The said plot No. was recorded as “Bansbagan” in record of rights.

Mr. Debabrata Saha Roy, learned senior counsel for the petitioner has placed relevant part of the notification wherein it has been mentioned that the character of the proposed land wherein the shop-cum-godown would be constructed should be “Dokan/Commercial/Bastu”. The land where the private respondent constructed her godown is “Bansbagan”. Thus, the private respondent has no eligible criteria to have the licence.

Mr. Saha Roy further pointed out that the Additional District Magistrate cannot form a committee for re-enquiry of the vacancy position after the enquiry has been conducted by the concerned Sub-Divisional Controller, Food and Supplies. He placed the notification dated 22^nd May, 2023 regarding the evaluation process of applications for grant of licence of FPS. He also placed the specific portion therein regarding the construction of the District Level Fair Price Shop Selection Committee.

Mr. Saha Roy submits that the concerned SCFS under the instruction of Additional District Magistrate cannot form a commit and re-enquiry the proposed shop-cum-godown of the applicants for second time. The act and action of the concerned SCFS, Mekligang by virtue of memo dated 11^th December, 2024 is beyond the provisions of the notification. By such they have exceeded their power. Hence, the decision making process has been vitiated. Thus, the selection of private respondent required to be set aside.

In support of his contentions, he cited a decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation & Ors Versus Anoj Kumar Agarwala & Others reported in (2020) 17 SCC 577 “16. It is clear even on a reading of this judgment that the words used in the tender document cannot be ignored or treated as redundant or superfluous-they must be given meaning and their necessary significance. Given the fact that in the present case, an essential tender condition which had to be strictly complied with was not so complied with, the appellant would have no power to condone lack of such strict compliance. Any such condonation, as has been done in the present case, would amount to perversity in the understanding or appreciation of the terms of the tender conditions, which must be interfered with by a constitutional court”. Mr. Suman Sengupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State authority on instruction submits that the offer letter as well as the licence has already been issue