Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/2118/2026 of DILIP BARMAN Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS on 23 April 2026
GAHC010073712026 2026:GAU-AS:5780 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2118/2026 DILIP BARMAN S/O LATE BIRENDRA CH BARMAN, R/O MISSION ROAD, KALAHBHANGA, P.O AND P.S- BARPETA ROAD, DIST BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN 781315 VERSUS THE STATE
GAHC010073712026
2026:GAU-AS:5780
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2118/2026
DILIP BARMAN
S/O LATE BIRENDRA CH BARMAN, R/O MISSION ROAD, KALAHBHANGA, P.O AND P.S- BARPETA ROAD, DIST BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN 781315
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL SECRETARY TO
GOVT OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS (ROADS) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY
781006
2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS (ROADS) DEPARTMENT
GOVT OF ASSAM
CHANDMARI
GHY 781003
3:EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS (ROADS) DEPARTMENT
GOVT OF ASSAM
BARPETA
MANDIA AND CHENGA TERRITORIAL ROAD DIVISION
BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN 78130
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. K. Bhuyan, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : XXXX
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
24.04.2026
Mr. K. Bhuyan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner has submitted that as on the date on which the writ petition was filed, i.e. on 06.04.2026, the Petitioner was not aware of the reasons as to why the Petitioner's technical bid was rejected. However, vide the communication dated 22.04.2026, the Petitioner has been informed by the Executive Engineer, PW(R)D that the Petitioner's technical bid has been rejected on account of not producing any document having “A Single Similar Work with Itemwise Qualifying Quantity in a Year” or “Multiple Works of Similar Nature with Itemwise Qualifying Quantity (cumulative) in a single year”.
2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submits that the reasons so assigned in the said communication dated 22.04.2026 are perverse and the Petitioner therefore would like to challenge the same. Under such circumstances, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner would like to withdraw the instant writ petition with a liberty to refile by challenging the communication dated 22.04.2026.
3. Taking into account the above submission, the writ petition stands closed on withdrawal.
4. Liberty, however, is given to the Petitioner again to refile by challenging the communication dated 22.04.2026, if so advised.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant