M/S A.C.T Builders And Company vs. The State Of Ap And 3 Others

WP(C)/47/2021HC GauhatiGSTCNR GAHC04000184202108 March 2021Bench: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA4 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The petitioner, M/s A.C.T Builders and Company, challenged a Tender Notice dated 15.02.2021 issued by the Project Director, District Rural Development Agency (DRDA), East Kameng District. The tender was for the supply and procurement of materials for MGNREGA works in Pakke-Kessang and Sejosa CD Blocks under Pakke-Kessang District. The petitioner argued that following the creation of the Pakke-Kessang District and the establishment of its DRDA, the tender notice ought to have been issued by the competent authority of Pakke-Kessang District, not East Kameng District. The petitioner cited an order appointing an in-charge Project Director for Pakke-Kessang District. The respondents contended that the appointment of the in-charge Project Director for Pakke-Kessang was unauthorized and void as it did not follow the prescribed procedure for appointing a Project Director, thus necessitating the issuance of the tender by the DRDA of East Kameng District.

Held

The Court held that in normal circumstances, a tender notice for works within a particular district should be invited by the authorities of that district, unless an alternative arrangement has been made authorizing another authority outside the district to exercise such jurisdiction. The respondents, while arguing that the appointment of the in-charge Project Director for Pakke-Kessang was not in accordance with the prescribed procedure, failed to provide any legal basis or arrangement demonstrating how the DRDA authorities of East Kameng District were vested with the power and jurisdiction to issue tenders for works executable in Pakke-Kessang District. In the absence of any legally valid arrangement, the Court concluded that the competent authority to invite the tender for works executable in Pakke-Kessang District should be the competent authority of Pakke-Kessang District. Consequently, the impugned Tender Notice dated 15.02.2021 was set aside and quashed, with liberty granted to the competent authority of Pakke-Kessang District to invite the tender in accordance with law.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Project Director, DRDA, East Kameng District, had the jurisdiction to invite a tender notice for MGNREGA works pertaining to the District of Pakke-Kessang, given the recent creation of the Pakke-Kessang District and the appointment of an in-charge Project Director for it. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the tender notice was issued without jurisdiction as it should have been issued by the competent authority of the newly created Pakke-Kessang District, citing the order appointing an in-charge Project Director for Pakke-Kessang District. They contended that the issuance by the East Kameng District authority was procedurally incorrect. Revenue/State's Contention: The respondents argued that the appointment of the in-charge Project Director for Pakke-Kessang District was unauthorized and void because it did not adhere to the procedure outlined in the Office Memorandum dated 12.06.1995, which mandates a selection committee for such appointments. Therefore, the tender had to be issued by the Project Director of East Kameng District.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040001842021 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C) 47/2021 1:M/s A.C.T Builders and Company MAIN MARKET, PAKKE KESSANG, PO/PS PAKKE KESSANG, DIST. PAKKE KESSANG, AP. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE SRI AKA TOK, 50 YRS, S/O SRI TAKAR TOK, MAIN MARKET, PAKKE KESSANG, PO/PS PAKKE KESSANG, DIST. PAKKE KESSANG. VERSUS 1:The State of AP and 3 Others REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ITANAGAR, AP. 2:THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT GOVT. OF AP ITANAGAR. 3:THE PROJECT DIRECTOR DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY EAST KAMENG DISTRICT SEPPA AP. 4:THE PROJECT DIRECTOR DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY PAKKE KESSANG DISTRICT PAKKE KESSANG A P Advocate for the Petitioner : Rintu Saikia Page No.# 2/4 Advocate for the Respondent : B. Picha BEFORE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA

ORDER Date : 09-03-2021 This writ petition is directed against the Tender Notice dated 15.02.2021 issued by the Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh vide order No. DRD/NREGS(NIT)-1/2020-21, whereby Item rate tender have been invited from all registered & eligible Contractors & Vendors/Firms having valid trading license with GST registration, for supply and procurement of materials pertaining to MGNREGA works-2020-21 for Pakke-Kessang and Sejosa CD Block under Pakke- Kessang District. Heard Mr. R. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Picha, learned Standing counsel for Rural Development representing all the respondents. The short and precise contention, which has been raised in the instant writ petition is that consequent upon creation of a new district of Pakke-Kessang and the establishment of District Rural Development Agency of Pakke-Kessang headquartered at Pakke-Kessang for the CD Blocks of Pakke-Kessang and Sejosa vide order dated 16.11.2020 issued on 1st February, 2021 by the Secretary (RD), Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh vide No.CD-379/2020(E)/166, the NIT in question for the MNREGA works which pertains to the District of Pakke-Kessang ought to have been issued by the competent authority of the District of Pakke-Kessang and not by an authority of another District of East Kameng. The petitioner also refers to the order dated issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Pakke-Kessang District vide order No.PKSG/ESTT- 01/201920/8013, whereby one Shri Pranjal Bora, O has been appointed as i/c Project Director (DRDA), Pakke-Kessang DIsrtict till appointment/posting of regular PD, DRDA in the District. The petitioner, therefore, contends that the impugned NIT dated 15.02.2021 issued by the Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, East Kameng District is without juri iction and the same ought to have been issued by the competent authority of the Pakke-Kessang District.

Page No.# 3/4 The respondent authorities have contested the case by filing a counter affidavit, wherein, it has been stated that though a new District of Pakke-Kessang has been created by the Government but the Government is yet to appoint Project Director, District Rural Development Agency for the Pakke-Kessang District and the appointment made to Shri Pranja Bora, O as i/c, Project Director, District Rural Development Agency till appointment/posting of regular PD, DRDA by the Deputy Commissioner, Pakke-Kessang District vide order dated 10.02.2021 is unauthorized and no-nest in law and therefore, it is under such a circumstance that the impugned NIT dated 15.02.2021 had to be issued by the PD, DRDA, East Kameng District, Seppa. To substantiate that the appointment of i/c PD, made by the Deputy Commissioner, Pakke- Kessang District vide order dated 10.02.2021 is not in accordance with the procedure for appointment of PD, the respondent authorities have referred to Office Memorandum dated 12.06.1995 issued by the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar annexed as (Annexure-2 to the counter affidavit filed by the respondents), wherein, it has been provided that there is selection committee for appointment of P.D.,comprising of:- (i) Chief Secretary -Chairman; (ii) Commissioner (RD)/Secretary -Member; (iii) Commissioner (Personnel)/Secretary (Personnel)- Member; and (iv) Director (RD) -Member&Convenor. It is further contended that the appointment of i/c PD, made by the Deputy Commissioner, Pakke-Kessang District being not inconsonance with the Office Memorandum dated 12.06.1995, the appointment of Shri Pranja Bora, O, as i/c PD is void. Be that as it may, the issue raised for determination of this Court in this writ petition is as to whether the DRDA authority of East Kameng District would have juri iction to invite NIT for the work pertaining to MGNREGA works, which work relates to the District of Pakke-Kessang. In a normal circumstances, the NIT for the said work in question should be invited by the authorities of that particular District where the works are to be executed, unless the respondent authorities have in the meantime, made an alternative arrangement authorizing

Page No.# 4/4 some other authorities outside the District to exercise such juri iction. In the instant case, the respondent authorities apart from contending that the appointment of i/c, PD, DRDA, Pakke-Kessang was not in accordance with the O.M. for appointment of P.D, have not indicated in any manner as to how the power and juri iction have been vested on the DRDA authorities of East Kameng District for the works which are executable in the District of Pakke-Kessang. In the absence of any such legally valid arrangement having been made by the respondent authorities, I am of the view that the competent authority to invite the tender for the work which is executable in the District of Pakke-Kessang should be invited by the competent authority of the District of Pakke-Kessang. In that view of the matter, the impugned NIT dated 15.02.2021 issued by the Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh vide order No. DRD/NREGS(NIT)-1 /2020-21 is hereby set aside and quashed leaving it open for the competent authority of the District of Pakke-Kessang to invite the tender for the said work in accordance with law. Writ petition stands disposed of in terms above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.