Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Prabal Kumar Basu vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 21 March, 2017
Author: Samapti Chatterjee
Bench: Samapti Chatterjee
1
2017
W.P. 7514(W) of 2017
Prabal Kumar Basu
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Mohammad Mahmud,
Mr. Padmalochan Sahoo
... For the Petitioner.
Mr. Pantu Deb Roy,
Mr. Subrata Guha Biswas
...For the State.
Despite service of notice no one appears on behalf of the respondent authority
and no adjournment is sought for.
Considering the urgency of the matter I direct Mr. Pantu Deb Roy, learned Advocate who usually appears on behalf of the State and who is present in court to appear in this matter along with Mr. Subrata Guha Biswas. The learned Legal Remembrancer is directed to regularise the appointment of Mr. Pantu Deb Roy and Mr. Subrata Guha Biswas.
The petitioner files the present writ petition assailing the impugned black listing order dated 23rd February, 2017 issued by the Executive Officer, Patashpur-I Panchayat Samity and also the present re-tender dated 7th March, 2017.
Mr. Mohammad Mahmud, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that earlier challenging the same tender proceedings, the petitioner approached before this Hon'ble Court thereby filing a writ petition being W.P. No.3733 (W) of 2016. That writ petition was disposed of by this Hon'ble Court 2 thereby directing the respondent authority to consider the petitioner's representation in accordance with law. Pursuant to that order, the respondent authority disposed of the petitioner's representation thereby holding as follows:
"After the final hearing from the Hon'ble High Court of Kolkata, Hon'ble Justice Dr. Sambudha Chakrabarti had passed an order with the instruction to the undersigned for taking hearing on the matter and to disposed off the case as to be found legally, going through the official documents. However, after taking a hearing as per the instruction of the High Court, you were informed by an order that, your raising grounds are totally baseless and without any valid grounds and your petition is not being considered for new engagement, thus the case was disposed off.
After he matter being disposed off, it has been decided by the Artha Santra Unnayan-O-Parikalpana Sthayee Samity of Patashpur-I Panchayat Samity on 11.08.2016 to ban you on participating in the E-Tender of the Panchayat Samity and as such your name is being Black listed for this Panchayat Samity area on participating in the E-Tender of the Panchayat Samity as well as Patashpur-I Dev. Block.
Henceforth, you will not be considered as valid participant in the E-Tender of this Block and Panchayat Samity.
This is for your information.
Executive Officer, Patashpur-I Panchayat Samity Dated 23.02.2017.
Mr. Mohammad Mahmud, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 23rd February, 2017 is wholly illegal an arbitrary and not only that the order has been passed by adopting unfair, unjust and unwarranted manner by the authority. Mr. Mohammad Mahmud, further submits that since challenging the tender process, the petitioner approached before the Hon'ble Court, therefore, the respondent authority by the impugned order dated 23rd February, 2017 victimised the petitioner thereby black listing the petitioner to participate in the e-tender of Panchayat Samity. Mr. Mohammad Mahmud further submits that challenging the illegality and irregularity any 3 citizen can file a writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court. But for approaching the Hon'ble High Court, no person should be victimised thereby black listing him from participating any tender process. He further submits that the contractor's business is the only livelihood of the petitioner. Therefore, if the petitioner is black listed whimsically and arbitrarily by the respondent authority then his livelihood is in stake. Mr. Mohammad Mahmud further submits that before the impugned black listing order dated 23rd February, 2017, in respect of the e- tender notice inviting e-tender dated 19th January, 2017, the petitioner participated thereby depositing the earnest money. Mr. Mohammad Mahmud further submits that from reliable sources, the petitioner came to learn that the petitioner is the lowest bidder in the said e-tender notice dated 19th January, 2017. Thereafter by the impugned order dated 23rd February, 2017, the respondent authority whimsically, arbitrarily and with some ulterior motive declared the petitioner as black listed thereby preventing the petitioner from participating in any tender process in respect of the said Panchayat area. Mr. Mohammad Mahmud further submits that the respondent authority after declaring the petitioner as black listed one, immediately on 7th March, 2017 floated re-tender thereby canceling the earlier tender dated 19th January, 2017. Challenging the said notice inviting re-tender dated 7th March, 2017, the petitioner also filed the present writ petition.
Mr. Deb Roy, learned Advocate appearing for the State respondents submits that he requires some time to take complete instructions. Mr. Deb Roy further submits that it is apparent from the notice inviting re-tender under serial Nos. 7 4 and 8 (appears at page 44 of the writ petition) that the technical bid has already been opened on 20th March, 2017 and 21st March, 2017 but the financial bid is scheduled to be opened on 22nd March, 2017 and 23r March, 2017 at 3-00 p.m. Therefore, at this juncture if the re-tender is stayed, then it will stall the entire process of work project.
Considering the submissions as advanced by the learned Advocate appearing for the parties and after perusing the records as also the impugned black listing order dated 23rd February, 2017 and the re-tender notice dated 7th March, 2017, this court is prima facie satisfied that just to victimise the petitioner, since he approached before this Hon'ble Court thereby challenging some other tender notice, the respondent authority black listed the petitioner and not only that thereafter re-tendered the earlier tender notice that is to say on 9th January, 2017, where the petitioner was allowed to participate. But by the impugned black listing notice dated 23rd February, 2017, the petitioner has been debarred to participate in the impugned re-tender notice dated 7th March, 2017 by the respondent authorities. Therefore, I direct the respondent authorities especially the Respondent No.4, the Executive Officer, Patashpur-I Panchayat Samity not to give any effect or further effect to the impugned black listing order dated 23rd February, 2017 till the disposal of the writ petition. I also restrain the respondent authorities from taking any steps or further steps in respect of the opening of the financial bid which is scheduled to be opened on 22nd March, 2017 and 23rd March, 2017 at 3-00 p.m. pursuant to the re-tender notice dated 7th March, 2017 till 7th April, 2017.5
Let the matter appear on 4th April, 2017 at 10-30 a.m. ( Samapti Chatterjee, J. ) s