By filing this writ petition & Ors. v. The State of Assam). Heard Mr. B. Buragohain, lear & Ors.

By filing this writ petition, the petitioner Sri Manuj Kutum, wh o is residing within the territorial jurisdiction of Madhya Sisi Tongani Anchali k Panchayat under the Dhemaji Zila Parishad, has prayed for a direction to the r espondents, particularly to the respondent No. 3 and 5, not to give effect of th e impugned NIT (Notice Inviting Tender) vide Memo No. DZP.29/2006-2007 dated 01. 06.2009 whereby and whereunder the Chief Executive Officer, Dhemaji Zila Parisha d, Dhemaji, the respondent No. 5 herein, issued the aforesaid NIT for settlement of Pujaghat of Sissi Bagibeel Parghat, as in Annexure-1 to the writ petition, w hich is in violation of the decision of Full Bench of this Court in W.A. 314 of 2008 (Harez Ali & others vs. The State of Assam & others). Heard Mr. B. Buragohain, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Roy, learned additional sr. Govt. Advocate appearing for the state respon dents. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The petitioner, an unemployed educated boy, who intended to part icipate in the bid settlement for Kareng Chapori toBagibeel Saikhowa Parghat, ch allenged the aforesaid NIT dated 01.06.2009 on the ground that the NIT was issue d in violation of the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 314 o f 2008 wherein the Full Bench held that the responsibility of floating such tend ers for settlement shall be vested upon the president of the Anchalik Panchayat, not to the Zila Parishad. The petitioner also contends that Notice Inviting Ten der in respect of market, ferry ghat and fisheries is always under the jurisdict ion of the concerned Panchayat and the tender valued upto 1 lakh, the concerned panchayat is required to obtain approval from the Zila parishad, but for the ten der valued for more than one lakh will be settled by the Zila parishad. The peti tioner along with other bidders approached the Dhemaji Zila Parishad and apprise d the same, but the Chief Executive Officer of Dhemaji Zila Parishad issued the said Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) for settlement of the aforesaid parghat for th e term of 2009-2010 fixing the last date of submission of tender on 23.6.2009 in the office of the Dhemaji Zila Parishad and the said tender will be opened on t he same day in presence of the bidders or their representatives. Being the said NIT was illegal, unauthorized and issued contrary to the decision of the Full Be nch of this Court, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition with the p rayer aforesaid. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would contend that in a simil ar matter, this Court has already issued notice and stayed the NIT issued by the respective Executive Engineer of the Zila Parishad. In support of his contentio n, he placed reliance on an order of this Court dated 10.6.2009 passed in W. P. (C) 2270 of 2009 (The Tingkhang Anchalik Panchayat Vs. The State of Assam & othe rs). He also contended that as the Zila Parishad issued the NIT in question with out any authority in view of the Full Bench decision of this Court, the same is liable to be set aside and/or quashed. On the other hand, learned Additional senior Govt. Advocate subm its that it would not be proper for the Court to quash the NIT in question in ab sence of the respondent Zila Parishad who issued the NIT though the same is cont rary to the decision of the Full Bench of this Court. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and on going th rough the records available before this Court, this Court is in agreement with t he submission of the learned Govt. Advocate that it would not be proper for this court to pass any order which will adversely affect the right of the respondent Zila Parishad without providing them any opportunity, but at the same time when the Court is not going to decide the matter on merit, rather wants to provide a n opportunity to the petitioner to approach the respondent authority by filing a representation to raise their grievances, till then the impugned NIT should not be given effect to. Probably it is also not necessary to give hearing to the re spondent Zila parishad authority when the said authority issued the impugned NIT contrary to the decision of the Full Bench of this Court, even after the same w as properly informed to the respondent Zila Prishad by the petitioner. More so, when in a similar matter, this Court on 10.6.2009 in W. P. (C) 2270/2009 having regard to the decision of the Full Bench stayed the process of settlement in res pect of Rajgarh weekly market, Rajgarh Bus stand and Tingkhang weekly market of Dibrugarh Zila Parishad in pursuance to tender dated 29.4.2009, there is no doub t that the NIT in question has also been issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Dhemaji zila Parishad without any authority. However, this Court is of considered view that it would not be p roper to quash the NIT in question at this stage without hearing the respondent Zila parishad, but at the same time, the Court has also to see that the petition er should not suffer and also the Court should not allow the respondent Zila Par ishad to proceed with the said NIT as the said authority has no jurisdiction. Accordingly, the writ petitioner is directed to submit a represe ntation to the Chief Executive Officer, Dhemaji Zila Parishad stating all his gr ievances along with a copy of this order as well as a copy of the order of the F ull Bench of this Court within a period of seven days from today and the Chief E xecutive Officer shall dispose of the said representation by a reasoned order wi thin a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of the said representatio n, till then, the NIT in question shall remain suspended. It is made clear that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the deci sion of the Chief Executive Officer, it is open for him to approach the appropri ate forum in accordance with law, if so advised. This order is passed as agreed to by the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the State respon dents. With the aforesaid order, the writ petition is disposed of.