Manoj Kumar Tiwari vs State Of Odisha & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 10190 Ori

                                       1


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                         W.P (C) No.27592 of 2023

Manoj Kumar Tiwari                  .....                              Petitioner
                                                    Mr. R.K. Mahanta, Advocate
                                    Vs.
State of Odisha & Ors.              .....                       Opposite Parties
                                                           Mr. T. Patnaik, ASC

            CORAM:
               DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI
               MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

                                            ORDER

28.08.2023

W.P.(C) No.27592 of 2023 And I.A. No.13206 of 2023

Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Heard Mr. R.K. Mahanta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. T. Patnaik, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-opposite parties.

3. Mr. R.K. Mahanta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that though the petitioner succeeded in OMMC Appeal Case No.04 of 2021, while passing the order, the appellate authority-cum-Collector, Nuapada indicated in the said order that opposite party no.8-Ritesh Agrawal, who was the highest bidder in the auction, intimated the competent authority that he was not interested to run the Risigaon Stone Quarry-1, even if the judgment in the appeal case is pronounced in his favour, and prayed to allow him to withdraw his Bank Guarantee. In Rule- 27(9) of OMMC Rules, 2016, it is stipulated that in the event of default by the selected bidder, the competent authority may issue intimation as specified in sub-rule(6) to the next highest bidder

who shall then be required to convey his acceptance and to make the security deposit calculated in the manner mentioned in sub-rule (7). It is contended that the petitioner, being the second highest bidder, should have been called for as per sub-rule (6) of Rule-27 of OMMC Rules, 2016. Instead of doing so, the Addl. District Magistrate, Nuapada, vide order/letter dated 03.08.2023, intimated the Tahasildar, Khariar to issue fresh auction for Saragadi-I Stone Quarry and Risigaon Stone Quarry-1.

4. As it appears, opposite party no.8-Ritesh Agrawal of Khariar had quoted the highest bid of Rs.170/-, but his application was not considered due to non-submission of money receipt (Original) towards purchase of tender paper. Other bidder, Smt. Sarita Agrawal of Khariar had also not submitted the original money receipt along with the tender paper, for which her application was rejected by the committee. The petitioner, having quoted Rs.100/-, was declared as successful bidder and, thereby, there is difference of Rs.70/- in the price bid between the highest bidder and the petitioner.

5. Mr. T. Patnaik, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-opposite parties seeks time to obtain instruction in the matter as to why and how the Collector, Nuapada has passed order in favour of the petitioner.

6. Issue notice to the opposite parties on Interlocutory Application.

                                                                (DR. B.R. SARANGI)
Signature Not Verified                                               JUDGE
Digitally Signed
Signed by: ALOK RANJAN SETHY
Designation: Secretary
Reason: Authentication
Location: Orissa High Court
Date: 29-Aug-2023 Alok
                    11:15:43                                      (M.S. RAMAN)
                                                                     JUDGE