Tuesday, 19, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Utpal Khargharia vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 3922 Gua

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 3922 Gua
Judgement Date : 29 September, 2022

Gauhati High Court
Utpal Khargharia vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 29 September, 2022
                                                             Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010186592022




                         THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

         Case : WP(C)/5919/2022

         UTPAL KHARGHARIA
         S/O- LT. PRABIN KHARGHARIA
         R/O- VILL- BORIGAON SAIDING
         KHARGHARIA CHOWK
         P.O. JORHAT
         DIST.- JORHAT- 785001


          VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.
         REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
         URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPTT.
         DISPUR
         GHY-06

         2:THE DIRECTOR
         MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION
          ASSAM
          DISPUR
          GHY-6
          3:JORHAT MUNICIPAL BOARD
         REP. BY ITS CHAIRPERSON
          A.T.ROAD
          JORHAT
          DIST.- JORHAT
          ASSAM- 785001
          4:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
         JORHAT MUNICIPAL BOARD
          DIST.- JORHAT
          ASSAM- 785001
          5:SHRI MINTU HAZARIKA
         S/O- SHRI BANSHI HAZARIKA
          R/O- BHARIGAON
                                                                                 Page No.# 2/5

              WARD NO. 19
              NIMATI ROAD
              P.O. JORHAT
              DIST.- JORHAT
              ASSAM- 785001
              6:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
             JORHAT
              ASSAM
              PIN-785001.
              ------------
              Advocate for : MR S N SARMA SENIOR ADVOCATE
             Advocate for : GA
              ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.



                                   BEFORE
                      HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

                                          ORDER

Date : 29-09-2022 Heard Mr. S.N. Sarma, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. M. Hussain, learned

counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. B.D. Das, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Ms.

R. Deka, learned counsel for the Jorhat Municipal Board, i.e. respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and

Ms. M. Barman, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2

and6.

The Jorhat Municipal Board, i.e. the respondent No. 3 had issued Notice Inviting

Tender (NIT) dated 23-06-2022 inviting bids for settlement of as many as 13 numbers of

markets/ stands for the financial year 2022-23, i.e. w.e.f. 01-08-2022 to 31-03-2023.

The petitioner herein had submitted his bid for settlement of "Truck Stand". On

opening the bids it turned out that there were 32 bidders whose tenders were found to be

technically responsive.

The petitioner had quoted a sum of Rs. 60,01,000/- and had emerged as the 3 rd Page No.# 3/5

highest bidder whereas the private respondent No. 5, who had quoted a sum of Rs.

24,30,000/-, was the 22nd highest bidder. Notwithstanding the same the Jorhat Municipal

Board had awarded the settlement of the market by the order dated 02-09-2022 in favour

of the respondent No. 5 at his offered rate. Aggrieved thereby, the instant writ petition

has been filed.

Mr. B.D. Das, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the Board submits that

representations had been received by the Board complaining about the high rates

demanded by the settlement holders and during the last two years, remissions had also to

be granted by the Board. As such, a decision has been taken not to award the settlement

in favour of the higher bidders. Therefore, taking into consideration the experience of the

bidders, the Board has taken a decision to award the settlement orders in favour of the

bidders quoting lower price.

Responding to the above, Mr. Sarma has argued that remissions were given due to

the outbreak of pandemic Covid-19. Under the terms and conditions of settlement, no

settlement holder can charge rates in excess of what has been fixed by the Board.

Therefore, the stand of the Board is totally untenable in law. By relying upon a decision of

this Court rendered in the case of Minku Hazarika Vs. State of Assam reported in

(2017) 5 GLT 696, Mr. Sarma further submits that in a exactly similar situation,

pertaining to tenders invited by the Jorhat Municipal Board for settlement of the markets,

this Court had set aside the orders of settlement issued in favour of the bidders quoting

lower price by ignoring higher bids, by rejecting the same stand taken by the Jorhat

Municipal Board. The decision rendered in the case of Minku Hazarika (Supra), Page No.# 4/5

according to Mr. Sarma is squarely applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case.

As such, the order of settlement is liable to be set aside.

I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for both the sides and

have also gone through the materials available on record. After a careful reading of the

statements in the writ petition, I find that this is yet another instance where the Jorhat

Municipal Board, after inviting bids for settlement of markets/ stand including the "Truck

Stand", based on financial quotes made by the bidders, has issued the order of settlement

in favour of the bidder who has quoted much lower price. In the case of Minku

Hazarika (Supra) this Court has clearly deprecated such practice of the Board and had

set aside similar orders of settlement issued in favour of the private respondents by giving

elaborate reasoning. Notwithstanding the same, the same mistake has again been

committed by the Board in the present series as well. The action on the part of the Jorhat

Municipal Board, apart from being illegal, also appears to be contemptuous on the face of

the record. This matter would, therefore, call for further examination.

Issue notice of motion returnable on 07-11-2022.

Since Ms. M. Barman, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam has accepted notice on

behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 6 and Ms. R. Deka, learned counsel appearing for the

Jorhat Municipal Board has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 3 and 4, no

formal notice is required to be sent to the said respondents.

Extra copies of the writ petition, requisite in numbers, be furnished to the learned

departmental counsel within a week from today so as to enable them to obtain Page No.# 5/5

instruction.

Petitioner to take steps for service of notice upon respondent No. 5 by registered

post with A/D.

Heard on the prayer of interim relief.

Due to the reasons stated hereinabove, I am of the view that the instant case is

covered by the judgment rendered in the case of Minku Saikia (Supra). As such, as an

ad-interim measure it is hereby provided that operation of the impugned order dated 02-

09-2022 shall remain suspended until further order(s). Consequently, it will be open for

the Jorhat Municipal Board to run and manage the "Truck Stand" by making an interim

arrangement without, however, involving any of the bidders including the respondent No.

5.

JUDGE GS

Comparing Assistant

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter