WPA/29065/2023 of MANDAL CONSTRUCTION Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 29 December 2023

29.12.2023Item No.4Ct. No.7Vacation BenchCHC(disposed of)

W.P.A.29065 of 2023

Mondal ConstructionVs.The State of West Bengal & ors.

Mr. Kamalesh Bhattacharya,Mr. Anit Dey

…for the petitioner

Mr. Lal Mohan Basu…for the NBSTC(respondent nos.2, 3 and 4)

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today istaken on record.

Mr. Kamalesh Bhattachaya, learned counselappears for the petitioner.

Mr. Lal Mohan Basu, learned counselappears for the respondent nos.2, 3 and 4.

Pursuant to a tender notice dated October16, 2023, Annexure- ‘P-1’at page 19 to the writpetition for engagement of Ticket Selling Agent inNBSTC Buses, the petitioner participated in thetender process and ultimately became a successfultendererinter aliain respect of the routeBerhampore – Kharagpur – 1 (for short the saidroute), Annexure-‘P-3” – ‘P-4” at pages 65 and 66 tothe writ petition. Suddenly, the petitioner wasinformed through a tender summary report dated December 15, 2023, Annexure-‘P-4’ at page 66 to thewrit petition that the grant of tender work in favour ofthe petitioner was cancelled due to “Administrativereasons/issues”.

Mr. Kamalesh Bhattacharya, learned counselfor the petitioner submits that such cancellation ofthe tender work already granted to the petitioner dueto administrative reason is not tenable in law asbefore cancellation no opportunity of hearing wasgranted to the petitioner and no constructive reasonwas disclosed to the petitioner as to why suchcancellation has happened. Such cancellation isimpugned through this writ petition.

Mr. Lal Mohan Basu, learned counselappearing for the respondent nos.2 to 4 referring toClause 3.6 of the General Information and Conditionsof the notice inviting the tender, Annexure-‘P-1’ atpages 19 and 20 to the writ petition submits that atall material point of time the right was reserved infavour of the tender inviting authority inter alia toreject the bid of any successful tenderer andterminate it without assigning any reason. Hesubmits that in view of the said clause no reason wasrequired to be assigned for rejection of the tender bidand accordingly, the petitioner’s bid wasterminated/cancelled without assigning any reason and there was no illegality or arbitrariness in thedecision.

On a query of this Court as to the presentstatus and stage of the second tender datedDecember 15, 2023, Annexure-‘P-7’ at page 70 to thewrit petition which has already been issued aftertermination of the first tender under which petitionerwas a successful bidder, the learned counsel for therespondent nos.2 to 4 could not appraise this Court.

Considering the rival submissions made onbehalf of the parties and considering the materials onrecord, it appears to this Court that, though the saidClause 3.6 of the notice inviting tender dated October16, 2023 mentioned for cancellation of bid no reasonwas required to be furnished by the tender invitingauthority, but the reasons for cancellation asappearing from the termination communication datedDecember 15, 2023 Annexure-‘P-4’ at page 66 to theeffect that cancellation was due to administrativereasons/issues is not convincing to this Court. Theauthority is supposed to give a constructive reasonwhen it rejects the bid of the petitioner which wasaccepted by the authority after application of itsmind.

In view of the foregoing reasons anddiscussions, the decision for terminating the offer ofthe petitioner dated December 15, 2023

Annexure-‘P4’ at pages 66 and 67 to the writ petitionstands set aside and quashed.

To subserve justice, the respondent no.2shall revisit the issue after granting an opportunity ofhearing to the petitioner through its authorizedrepresentative by passing a reasoned order inaccordance with law.

Issues

The respondent no.2 shall hold the hearingon January 3, 2024 at its office at Coochbehar at 11a.m. as agreed by the parties represented before thisCourt and then after granting an opportunity ofhearing shall pass its reasoned order andcommunicate the same to the petitioner forthwith.

The entire exercise shall be carried out andcompleted by the respondent no.2 positively within aperiod of 10 working days from January 3, 2024.

It is made clear that this Court has not goneinto the merits of the case made out in the writpetition and that the respondent authority and thepetitioner shall be at liberty to urge whatever pointsthey wish to urge before the respondent no.2 byrelying upon whatever documents and records theywish to rely upon.

It is also made clear that this order shall notcreate any right or equity in favour of the petitionerand the respondent no.2 shall be free to decide the issue in accordance with law by applying itsindependent mind.

Since affidavits are not called for, theallegations made in this writ petition are deemed notto have been admitted by the respondents.

Till the reasoned order is communicated tothe petitioner as directed above, no further effect shallbe given to the said second tender process pursuantto the notice inviting tender dated December 15, 2023Annexure-‘P-7’ at page 70 to the writ petition.

If the reasoned order goes against thepetitioner then the respondent authority shall be freeto proceed with the second tender process under thenotice inviting tender dated December 15, 2023Annexure-‘P-7’ at page 70 to the writ petitionimmediately.

On the above terms this writ petitionW.P.A.29065 of 2023 stands disposed of, without anyorder as to costs.

(Aniruddha Roy, J.)