Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Agamon Mineral Industry Llp vs The State Of West Bengal And Others on 19 June, 2018
1
19.06.2018.
Item No. 4
(W)
W.P. 6824 of 2018
Agamon Mineral Industry LLP
Vs.
The State of West Bengal and others.
Mr. Saptansu Basu,
Mr. Raju Mondal.
... for the petitioner.
Mr. Amitava Mitra,
Mr. Saikat Chatterjee.
... for the State.
The petitioner participated in a tender floated for extracting
the mines and minerals i.e. Quartz in Block-Kenda in the district
of Purulia and was adjudged as a highest bidder.
Despite being adjudged as highest bidder, neither any permit
nor any documents was executed by the respondent authorities in
favour of the petitioner to enable it to start the mining activities. Several representations came to be made with the respondent authorities yet none of the representations have been attended to.
The learned advocate for the respondent authorities submits that a disqualified tenderer filed a writ petition being WP 670 (W) of 2018 before this Court challenging the entire tender process on various grounds including the ground that the conditions incorporated therein would manifest that the authorities intended to disqualify a person from participating in the tender process to favour some designated persons. The said writ petition came up for disposal on 18th January 2018 and the Hon'ble Single Bench 2 dismissed the said writ petition as the said disqualified tenderer could not prove that the conditions enshrined in the tender document shook the conscience of the Court and was so irrational and unreasonable that such conditions cannot be allowed to remain therein.
It is informed to the Court that an appeal against the said order has been filed by the said disqualified tenderer but neither any order of injunction has been passed putting fetter against the respondent authorities to proceed upon the said tender nor the said appeal has been admitted as yet by the Division Bench.
In view of the above, this Court does not find that there is any fetter on the part of the respondent authorities to proceed with the tender process simply because an appeal has been filed by a disqualified tenderer against the order rejecting the writ petition.
It is submitted by the petitioner that the disqualified tenderder is neither necessary nor a proper party in the instant writ petition and, therefore, there cannot be any impediment on the part of the Court to proceed to decide the writ petition finally.
Indubitably, the petitioner has been declared as highest bidder in an open tender process and, therefore, has accrued some right in respect thereof. The authorities cannot sit tight over the matter simply because an appeal has been preferred by a person, who could not participated in a tender process.
It is no longer res integra that mere filing an appeal does not tantamount to stay of the proceeding unless there is an express order passed by the Court. This Court, therefore, does not find any justification in the action of the respondent authorities in sitting tight over the matter and waiting for the decision to come in the appeal filed before the Division Bench.
This Court, therefore, directs the respondent authorities to proceed in taking a decision for granting the mining permit to the 3 petitioner within four weeks from date of communication of this order.
It goes without saying that the authorities are free to take decision irrespective of any observations made herein above and shall record its decision on fulfillment of other conditions and criterions required therefor.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
ab (Harish Tandon, J.)