Page No.# 1/9 vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 3802 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/9 vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 6 March, 2025

                                                                   Page No.# 1/9

GAHC010185442024




                                                             2025:GAU-AS:2379

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

                        Case No. : WP(C)/4627/2024

         ABDUL AWAL
         S/O- MIYAR UDDIN, VILLAGE- LATAKHAT, P.O.- BALABA, P.S. DHULA,
         DISTRICT- DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN- 784146



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
         REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, TRANSPORT
         DEPARTMENT (INLAND WATER DIVISION), DISPUR, GUWAHAT- 781006

         2:THE JOINT SECRETARY
         ASSAM
          REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
         TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT (INLAND WATER DIVISION)
          DISPUR
          GUWAHAT- 781006

         3:THE DIRECTOR OF INLAND WATER TRANSPORT
          GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
          ULUBARI
          GUWAHATI- 781005

         4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
          INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DIVISION
          OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF IWT
          ULUBARI
          GUWAHATI- 781005

         5:HAZRAT ALI
          S/O- AHMED ALI
         VILLAGE- OADAL BHETI
          P.O. AND P.S. BHURAGAON
                                                                        Page No.# 2/9

             DISTRICT- MORIGAON
             ASSAM
             PIN- 78212

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B B NARZARY, M. BORUAH,R DEB,MR N ALAM,MR. P
MAZUMDER,MR. S CHAUHAN

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, ASSAM, MR. K P PATHAK (R-
7),SC, IWT




                                  BEFORE
                      HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE

                                   JUDGMENT

Date : 06.03.2025

Heard Mr. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M.D. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Transport Department and Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned counsel for the respondent No.7.

2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has put to challenge the rejection of his tender and the order dated 30.08.2024, by which, the settlement of Bhuragaon-Badlichar via Pavakati, Malahu, Kalichar, Magurmari, Chialmari, Karaikhowa Ferry Service for the period 2024-26 has been granted to one Shri Hazrat Ali, the respondent No. 7 herein, pursuant to the tender dated 01.02.2024 issued by the Director, IWT, Assam for ferry service of 23 ferries.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he being an unemployed youth and claims to be a boatman has submitted his bid in response to the tender NIT dated 01.02.2024 issued by the Director of IWT, Govt. of Assam, inviting leasing out of IWT ferry service for the financial year 2024-26 for 23 Ferry services including Bhuragaon-Badlichar via Pavakati, Malahu, Kalichar, Page No.# 3/9

Magurmari, Chialmari, Karaikhowa Ferry Service on 14.02.2024 through the registered portal on online system. It is contended that the petitioner has submitted all the required documents along with the tender paper. Altogether six tenderers including the petitioner had participated in the tender process. It is contended that the petitioner is the highest bidder being quoted bid value of Rs.19,10,000/- and the second highest bidder is Rs.12,10,000/- and the third is Rs.6,60,000/- and the respondent No.7 had offered Rs.6,57,000/- with a difference of the bid value of Rs.12,53,000/- between the petitioner and the respondent No. 7.

4. It is the contention of the petitioner that under wrong impression he has submitted financial soundness certificate from non-nationalized bank being Northeast Small Finance Bank. However, having realized his mistake, he again submitted financial soundness certificate from the State Bank of India, Mangaldai branch on 31.05.2024 to the Director of IWT. It is the contention of the petitioner that as per Clause 23 of the NIT, the petitioner has the right to get relaxed of any condition of NIT considering the practical and on field situation. The NOC in the form of affidavit by eight co- pattadars was also submitted, but the same has not been considered by the respondent authorities.

5. The petitioner contends that the respondent authorities have illegally

chosen the 4th highest bidder i.e. the respondent No.7. The petitioner obtained the documents of the respondent No. 7, as the respondent No. 7 has been illegally settled with the said ferry service. After obtaining the documents of respondent No.7, it is found that the documents such as, Jamabandi, Land Valuation Certificate, NEC, IT return and Financial Page No.# 4/9

Soundness Certificate were not self-attested as per NIT as under Clause 3 of the terms and condition it provides that the tender must be accompanied with self attested copies of document, failing which, the tender shall be treated as invalid tender. Despite such vital defect of the document of the respondent No.7, the respondent authorities have illegally settled the tender for the aforesaid ferry service in favour of the respondent No.7 by

an order dated 30.08.2024, who is the 4 th highest bidder ignoring the petitioner who has quoted Rs.19,10,000/- having a difference of Rs.12,53,000/-, which would cause loss to the exchequer.

6. Mr. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner while referring to the Clause-3 of the terms and condition, submits that as per the tender condition, the tender must be accompanied with self-attested copy of documents, failing which, the tender will be treated as invalid tender. Therefore, since the respondent No.7 has not submitted self-attested documents with the tender form, the tender of the respondent No.7 ought to have been rejected. More so, the petitioner is the highest bidders

amongst the six bidders and the respondent No.7, being only the 4 th highest bidder, he could not have been settled with the tender.

7. Mr. S. Chauhan, learned counsel, referring to the Clause 23 of the terms and condition, wherein, the right to relax any of the terms and condition of NIT in consideration of practical and on field situation, submits that the inadvertent mistake of submitting financial soundness certificate from non-nationalized bank and later on having submitted the financial soundness certificate from the State Bank of India, the condition ought to have been relaxed and the petitioner being the highest bidder among six Page No.# 5/9

tenderers ought to have been granted the settlement. Therefore, he submits that the settlement order dated 30.08.2024, in favour of the respondent No.7, may be set aside and the petitioner, being the highest bidder, the respondent authorities may be directed to settle the tender with the petitioner.

8. Ms. M.D. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Transport Department, while referring to the affidavit-in-opposition on behalf of the respondent No.3, submits that Clause 28 of the terms and condition of the NIT, prescribes that the bidders shall require to submit all the bid document through online portal only. As such, hard copies have not been accepted and the tender has been finalized solely on the basis of documents submitted on online portal. She submits that the tender bids of the tenderers, namely Jamat Ali, Altaf Hussain and the petitioner, were rejected due to non-submission of the required documents as per NIT. She submits that the Tender Evolution Committee would not know the amount quoted unless the financial bid is opened after being found responsive in the technical bid. She further submits that the respondent No.7, although had not submitted most of the documents with self-attestation, but had submitted self-attested copies of NOC of co-pattadars, Aadhar Card and Declaration. As per the Government order, for proper execution of lease agreement, lessee has to produce the original landed property document and land value for the examination and verification of the genuineness by competent authority. Accordingly, for proper execution of the lease, original landed property documents of the respondent No.7 were verified and found in order. Therefore, there is no illegality in the tender process and the settlement of the ferry service in favour of the respondent No.7 and as such, the writ petition may be dismissed.

Page No.# 6/9

9. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.

10. Pursuant to the NIT dated 01.02.2024, six tenderers including the petitioner have submitted their bids in respect of Bhuragaon-Badlichar via Pavakati, Malahu, Kalichar, Magurmari, Chialmari, Karaikhowa Ferry Service for the period 2024-26. The meeting of Tender Committee was held on 28.06.2024, regarding the settlement of 18 nos. of ferry services under IWT division, Guwahati and Silchar and after scrutiny of the bidders, it is found that the petitioner has failed to submit experience certificate/financial soundness certificate, therefore, out of six bidders, three bidders including the petitioner were found non-responsive. The bid of the respondent No.7, namely Hazrat Ali and two others, were found to have submitted all documents as per the NIT. The Financial bids of the respondent No.7 and two others were open and on scrutiny of the financial bid, the respondent No.7 has been found to be quoted the highest bid being Rs.6,57,000/- and was declared L1. Accordingly, the ferry service in respect of Bhuragaon-Badlichar via Pavakati, Malahu, Kalichar, Magurmari, Chialmari, Karaikhowa Ferry Service was settled in favour of the respondent No.7.

11. The NIT dated 01.02.2024 was issued along with the terms and conditions for leasing out of the ferry services for the financial year 2024-

26. Clause 11 of the terms and conditions provides that certified copies of updated income tax return must be submitted along with the tender. Further it is provided that the tenderer whose bid is less than Page No.# 7/9

Rs.6,00,000/-, submission of income tax return along with the tender will not be mandatory. It further provides that the copies of experience certificate issued by DC/ADC/SDO etc., must be submitted along with the tender. In case of new tenderer, a certificate of financial soundness of the tenderer from D.C./A.D.C./SDO Sadar/SDO (Civil) of District/Sub-Division or any nationalized Bank should be enclosed. It is seen that the terms and condition of NIT requires submission of certified copy of updated income tax return and copies of experience certificate and the financial soundness of the tenderer from D.C./A.D.C./SDO or any nationalized bank must be enclosed.

12. Clause-3 of the terms and condition provides that irrespective of availability of vessels/boats, the offered bid value per annum basis should be quoted inclusive of staff salary for each ferry service. Tender must be accompanied with self-attested copy of documents, failing which, the tender will be treated as an invalid tender. As reflected in the affidavit on behalf of the respondent authorities, it is seen that most of the documents of the respondent No.7 were not self-attested except for few documents. However, as per the Government order, before the settlement is granted, the original document is required to be verified and the records indicates that the original documents of the respondent No.7 was verified and thereafter, only the settlement was granted to the respondent No.7 having been found to be the highest bidder.

13. Regard being had to the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Director, IWT has the right to relax any terms and condition of the NIT in consideration of practical and field situation, in the Page No.# 8/9

process of finalization of bids as per Clause 23 of the terms and condition of the NIT and therefore, non-submission of required documents ought to have been relaxed by invoking power of relaxation, I am not persuaded with the same as the power to relax has been provided for relaxation of any terms and condition of the NIT taking into consideration of the practical and on field situation while in the process of finalization of bids and same would not mean that non-submission of required documents would be relaxed. If such contention is allowed, it would defeat the whole purpose of tender. The tenderer cannot as a matter of right, claim for such relaxation.

14. The petitioner, admittedly, has failed to submit experience and financial soundness certificate as well as other required documents, which is clearly reflected on his own showing that he submitted the certificate of financial soundness from non-nationalized bank being Northeast Small Finance Bank under wrong impression. Thus, the petitioner would not have any reason and right to claim relaxation as he has failed to submit the required document as per NIT.

15. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raunaq International Ltd. -vs- I.V.R. Construction Ltd. and others, reported in (1999) 1 SCC 492, has held that any judicial relief at the instance of a party which does not fulfill the requisite criteria, is misplaced and the tender cannot be interfered with at the instance of a party which bid does not fulfill the requisite criteria.

16. In the present case, the petitioner who has challenge the settlement of ferry service with the respondent No. 7 did not fulfill the requisite criteria, as he failed to submit the financial soundness certificate. That Page No.# 9/9

apart, the present case is not a case where any malafide has been alleged nor there is any allegation of any collateral motive for entering into a settlement with the respondent No.7. The only ground of challenge is that the respondent No.7 has not submitted self-attested documents along with bid, to which, this Court has found that the said documents were examined before the final settlement was granted to the respondent No.7 as per requirement. Therefore, this Court finds no substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent No.7 did not fulfill the criteria of the NIT and the power of relaxation as provided under Clause 23 of the terms and condition which ought to have been invoked as the petitioner failed to submit the mandatory documents as per Clause -11 of the terms and condition, which is clearly admitted by him and as such this Court finds no illegality in the tender process and the consequent settlement of the tender with the respondent No.7.

17. In view of the discussion made hereinabove, this Court is of the considered view that no case is made out for interference with the tender process vide NIT dated 01.02.2024 and settlement of lease granted to the respondent No.7 in respect of Bhuragaon-Badlichar via Pavakati, Malahu, Kalichar, Magurmari, Chialmari, Karaikhowa Ferry Service for the period 2024-26.

18. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed being devoid of any merit. However, no order as to costs.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant