ORDER

Date : 27-05-2022 Heard Mr. P. Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioner Ms. M.D. Borah, learned Standing Counsel, Transport Department for the respondent nos. 1-3.

2. The subject-matter of this writ petition is a public ferry service viz. Jatinga Ferry Service [‘the Ferry Service’, for short]. The petitioner participated in a tender process initiated by a Tender Notice dated 17.03.2022 for settlement of a number of ferry services including Jatinga Ferry Service for the month of April, 2022 to June, 2022 for a period of 92 [ninety two] days. The petitioner participated responding to the Tender Notice dated 17.03.2021 by submitting in respect of Jatinga Ferry Service. According to the petitioner, he emerged as the successful bidder in the tender process. As a result, the respondent no. 3 settled the Ferry Service in favour of the petitioner by an order dated 23.03.2022 for a period of only 30 [thirty] days w.e.f. 01.04.2022 to 30.04.2022. Before the period of settlement was over, the respondent no. 2 on 25.04.2022 directed the respondent no. 3 to settle the Ferry Service in favour of one Md. Khairul Islam Borbhuiya purportedly at his offered bid amount on temporary mode until further orders. Thereafter, the respondent no. 3 passed an order on 30.04.2022 whereby said Md. Khairul Islam Borbhuiya [respondent no. 4] was allowed to operate the Ferry Service temporarily from 01.05.2022 to 31.05.2022. The petitioner is inter alia aggrieved by the fact that when a tender process initiated by the Tender Notice dated 17.03.2022 was for a period of settlement from April, 2022 to June, 2022, the respondent authorities could not have settled the same Ferry Service with the orders dated 25.04.2022 and 30.04.2022 in favour of a person who did not emerge as the successful bidder in the tender process initiated by the Tender Notice dated 17.03.2022. The petitioner has also sought for a direction to the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to temporarily operate the Ferry Service for the remaining period up to June, 2022. 3. Ms. Borah, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Transport Department authorities has submitted that by a communication bearing no. TWT.13/2021/33 dated 24.05.2022, the State Government in the Transport Department had directed the respondent no. 2 to operate a number of ferry services including the Jatinga Ferry Service departmentally till completion of a fresh settlement process in the year 2022-2024 by making temporary settlement. Subsequently, on 25.05.2022, a Corrigendum has been issued by the same authority clarifying that the temporary operation of the stated ferry service including Jatinga Ferry Service departmentally but there would not be any temporary settlement. It is the submission of the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Transport Department authorities that there would not be any temporary settlement of Jatinga Ferry Service without being preceded by a tender process as per the provisions of Control and Management of Ferries Rules, 1968. The concerned ferry service i.e. Jatinga Ferry Service would be run departmentally till the Ferry Service is settled pursuant to a tender process initiated under the provisions of Control and Management of Ferries Rules, 1968.

4. In view of the above submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Transport Department; and considering the fact that the concerned Ferry Service would be operated departmentally henceforth, there appears to be no necessary for adjudication of the issues raised in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. It is observed that the respondent authorities in the Transport Department is at liberty to settle the Ferry Service by adhering to the procedure laid down in the Control and Management of Ferries Rules, 1968 and there shall not be any temporary settlement of the Ferry Services without being preceded by any tender process.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant