WP(C) No. 2757 of 2005. Case: Lila Borah Vs State of Assam and Ors.. Guwahati High Court
| Case Number | WP(C) No. 2757 of 2005 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: D.C. Mahanta and N.K. Barua, Advs. and For Respondents: G. Soren, S. Barua, Y.K. Phukan and D. Das, Advs. |
| Judges | H.N. Sarma, J. |
| Issue | Assam Municipal Act, 1956 - Sections 147, 148, 301; Rule 7 |
| Citation | 2006 (1) GLR 445, 2005 (4) GLT 715 |
| Judgement Date | May 19, 2005 |
| Court | Guwahati High Court |
Judgment:
H.N. Sarma, J.
-
Vide tender notice dated 7.1.2005 Sonari Municipal Board, respondent No. 4 invited a tender for settlement of Sonari Municipal Daily Market for the period from 2005-06 commencing from 1.4.2005 to 31.3.2006. The last date for settlement of the tender was fixed on 11.2.2005 upto 1 p.m. Pursuant to the aforesaid tender notice as many as four tenderers including the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 submitted their respective tenders praying for settlement of the said market offering their respective bid - the petitioner offered Rs. 7,80,500 where the respondent No. 5 offered Rs. 7,28,650. As per Clause 2 of the tender notice the tenderers were required to submit original documents such as Myadi Patta, Zamabandi, non-incumbrance certificate, land revenue paying Receipt, Income tax, Sales tax, Municipal tax, Gaon Panchayat tax clearance certificate of tenderers/guarantor along with the tender. The Municipal Board held its meeting on 22.3.2005 for consideration of the settlement of the aforesaid market and vide resolution No. 2(ga) the respondent No. 5 was settled with the aforesaid market at his bid value of Rs. 7,28,650. Vide resolution No. 2(ka), the bid offered by the petitioner amounting to Rs. 7,80,500 was rejected primarily on two counts, namely that the bid offered by the petitioner is higher by Rs. 1,30,760 than the last year's bid and the value of the property offered as security is less than the bid amount offered by him. It is also noted in the said resolution that as the bid offered by the petitioner is more than last year's bid an apprehension has been expressed, that may lead to additional burden of tax/toll upon the traders. So far the grounds incorporated for acceptance of tender of the Respondent No. 5 which is stated in its said resolution is that the tender of the Respondent No. 5 has offered Rs. 78,910 more than the last year's bid and if the market is settled at his offered rate of Rs. 7,28,650 then there is no possibility of additional burden of tax upon the trader. Admittedly the petitioner having offered Rs. 7,80,500 and the respondent No. 5 having offered Rs. 7,28,650, the bid offered by the petitioner is substantially higher than that of respondent No. 5. The said resolution was adopted by the Municipal Board was forwarded for necessary approval to the Director, Municipal Administration Department. There is a set of rules known as Rules for procedure for sale of pond and market by the Municipal Board and town committee of Assam, which are framed in exercise of power conferred by Sections 147, 148 and 301 of the Assam Municipal Act, 1956. Rule 7 of the aforesaid Rules is quoted herein below; as it is relevant for the purpose of this case.
Rule 7: Every bid made shall be recorded in writing by the officer conducting the sale. He shall not be bound to accept the highest or any bid; but if he does not accept the highest or any bid, he shall record his reasons in writing. The lease...
To continue reading
Request your trial