Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/6 vs The Btad And 7 Ors on 7 August, 2025
Author: Devashis Baruah
Bench: Devashis Baruah
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010073022025
2025:GAU-AS:10461
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/1925/2025
PADMA KALITA
S/O LATE NOBIN CHANDRA KALITA, R/O BASUGAON TOWN, WARD NO. 2,
P.S.- BASUGAON, DIST- CHIRANG, ASSAM, PIN-783372
VERSUS
THE BTAD AND 7 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, BODOLAND TERRITORIAL DEPARTMENT, KOKRAJHAR,
ASSAM
2:THE EXECUTIVE MEMBER
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
BODOLAND TERRITORIAL DEPARTMENT
BTC
KOKRAJHAR
3:THE BASUGAON MUNICIPAL BOARD
REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN
BASUGAON
DIST- CHIRANG
PIN-783372
4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
CHIRANG
DIST- CHIRANG
5:THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
DISPUR
GUWAHATI 06
Page No.# 2/6
6:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
BASUGAON MUNICIPAL BOARD
BASUGAON
DIST- CHIRANG
PIN-783372
7:JANEN BRAHMA
S/O NIREN BRAHMA
R/O VILL- TENGNAMAR
DIST- CHIRANG
PIN-783372
8:PRITAM DEY
S/O LATE DULAL CHANDRA DEY
R/O SUBASH NAGAR
BASUGAON
WARD NO.1
CHIRANG
PIN-78337
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Kataki, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. M. Chetia, Govt. Advocate
Mr. S. Bora, Standing Counsel
Mr. B.K. Gogoi, Advocate
Date of Hearing : 07.08.2025
Date of Judgment : 07.08.2025
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
Heard Mr. P. Kataki, the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioner. Mr. S. Bora, the learned Standing Counsel
appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 6; Mr. M.
Page No.# 3/6
Chetia, the learned Government Advocate appears on behalf of the
respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and Mr. B.K. Gogoi, the learned counsel
appears on behalf of the respondent No. 7.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being
aggrieved by the action on the part of the respondent No. 3 in
awarding the Cattle Market under Basugaon Municipal Board for the
year 2025-26 in favour of the respondent No. 7 in spite of the fact
that the petitioner was the highest bidder.
3. This Court duly takes note of that the respondent No. 3 had
issued a Notice Inviting Tender dated 07.03.2025 for the period 2025-
26 for settlement of the Cattle Market under the Basugaon Municipal
Board for the settlement period i.e. 01.04.2025 to 31.03.2026. The
petitioner along with various other bidders participated in the said
tender process. The bid quoted by the petitioner was Rs. 12,51,000/-.
However, the bid quoted by the respondent No. 7 was Rs. 5,30,355/-.
The Tender Evaluating Committee of the respondent No. 3 Board
selected by majority the petitioner for the financial year 2025-26 as
the lessee of the Cattle Market. However, the respondent No. 2, who
otherwise did not have any authority insisted upon the respondent
No. 3 to award the settlement of the Cattle Market to the respondent
No. 7 at an amount of Rs. 5,30,355/- and resultantly, the settlement
order dated 28.03.2025 was issued. Being aggrieved, the petitioner
Page No.# 4/6
has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
4. This Court vide an order dated 04.04.2025 stayed the settlement
order dated 28.03.2025 in favour of the respondent No. 7. The interim
order thereupon has been continued. The record further reveals that
in spite of opportunity being granted, no affidavit has been filed by
the respondents.
5. Today, Mr. S. Bora, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 6 has placed before this
Court, a para wise comments issued by the Chairman of the
respondent No. 3. The said para wise comments is kept on record and
marked with the letter "X". From a perusal of the said para wise
comments, it is seen that though the petitioner is the highest bidder,
but because of the fact that the respondent No. 2 who is a superior
authority of the respondent No. 3 had issued a communication
directing the respondent No. 3 to allow the settlement of Cattle
Market in favour of the respondent No. 7, the impugned settlement
order dated 28.03.2025 was made in favour of the respondent No. 7.
6. It is the opinion of this Court that such actions on the part of the
Respondent Authorities to issue the impugned settlement order dated
28.03.2025 in favour of the respondent No. 7 is a clear case of
violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India inasmuch as, the
same is not only a case of unreasonableness and arbitrariness, but
Page No.# 5/6
also suffers from malice in law and abuse of the powers conferred
upon the Authorites. It is also the opinion of this Court that granting a
settlement in favour of a person whose bid was lower than another
eligible bidder who had quoted a higher rate and that too without
justifiable reasons is not in public interest. Accordingly, the impugned
settlement order dated 28.03.2025 is required to be interfered with.
7. This Court therefore disposes of the instant writ petition with the
following observations and directions:
(i) The impugned settlement order dated 28.03.2025 in favour
of the respondent No. 7 for the settlement of the Cattle Market
under the Basugaon Municipal Board for the year 2025-26 is set
aside and quashed.
(ii) The Respondent Authorities, more particularly, the
respondent No. 3 is directed to proceed for settlement of the
Cattle Market on the basis of the comparative justification report
and allot the said market in accordance with law.
(iii) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent
No. 7 submitted that he had submitted the earnest money and
appropriate direction be issued by this Court that the Respondent
Authorities should return the said earnest money. It is the
opinion of this Court that if the respondent No. 7 wishes to seek
Page No.# 6/6
refund of the earnest money, appropriate application may be
filed before the concerned Respondent Authorities and the
concerned Respondent Authorities shall duly consider the same
within the parameters of law.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
