Patna High Court - Orders
Amarjeet Kumar Roy & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 September, 2014
Author: Mihir Kumar Jha
Bench: Mihir Kumar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14930 of 2014
======================================================
1. Amarjeet Kumar Roy Son of Sri Harish Roy, resident of village-
Kamargama, P.O. Hira Jatmalpur, P.S. Kalyanpur, District- Samastipur
2. Harendra Yadav, son of Sri Naseeb Lal Yadav, resident of village- Balha
Sabaul, P.O. Barhulia, P.S. Simri, District- Darbhanga
3. Pappu Kumar Son of Late Rampareet Mahaseth, Resident of Mohalla-
Pandasarai, Ward No. 48, P.O. AND P.S. Laheriasarai, District- Darbhanga
4. Sanjay Kumar Mahaseth, Son of Late Rampareet Mahaseth, Resident of
Mohalla- Pandasarai, Ward No. 48, P.O. AND P.S. Laheriasarai, District-
Darbhanga
5. Govind Kumar Choudhary, Son of Sri Parsan Kumar Choudhary, resident
of village- Chandauli, P.O. Nikaspur, District- Samastipur
6. Lakshmi Kant Mishra, son of Late Yogi Mishra, resident of Village-
Sanahpur, District- Darbhanga
7. Madhvi Devi, wife of Parsan Kumar Choudhary, resident of village-
Chandauli, P.O. Nikaspur, District- Samastipur
8. Revti Raman Choudhary, son of Sri Shyam Kishore Choudhary, resident
of village- Chandauli, P.O. Nikaspur, District- Samastipur
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar, through the Secretary, Department of Education,
Government of Bihar, Patna
2. The Director, Mid-day Meal Programme, Government of Bihar, Patna
3. The District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, Mid-day Meal Programme
Samiti, Darbhanga
4. The District In-charge Officer, Mid-day Meal Programme, Darbhanga
5. The Additional Deputy Collector, Darbhanga
6. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Darbhanga
7. The District Education Officer, Darbhanga
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sudhir Singh, Adv.
Mr. Arbind Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar, AC to SC17
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 15-09-2014Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The prayer of the petitioners in this writ application reads as follows:
"(i) To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash and cancel the letter no. 1989/C dated 25.7.2014 (Annexure 8 Patna High Court CWJC No.14930 of 2014 (3) dt.15-09-2014 2 hereof) issued under the authority of District Magistrate, Darbhanga, whereby and whereunder the minutes of selection and selection list dated 17.6.2014 arising out of Annexure 1 hereof which is a decision of the duly constituted Selection Committee, has been cancelled and direction has been given to initiate fresh process of tender for the same purpose.
(ii) To hold and declare that the said minutes and selection list dated 17.6.2014 vide Annexure 5 and hereof are the legal and valid piece of documents in the eye of law.
(iii) To hold and declare that the action of the District Magistrate, Darbhanga by which the letter no. 1989 dated 20.7.2014 vide Annexure 8 hereof has been issued is a discriminatory, malafide order and it is a foul play to outs the genuine, legal and valid contractor out of the selection under the bad political influence. As such, the action of the learned District Magistrate, Darbhanga is a violation of the law emanating from the provision of contract Act, Article 14 and Article 229 of the Constitution of India.
(iv) To restrain the respondent no.3 to not disturb these petitioners by interfering in the minutes and selection list vide Annexure 5 and 7 hereof because they have been selected after proper consideration of Selection Committee as they are the best suitable and genuine contractor/ transporter out of total participants.
(v) To hold and declare that the impugned order is a violation of principles of natural justice.Patna High Court CWJC No.14930 of 2014 (3) dt.15-09-2014 3
(vi) To direct the respondent to assign the work of transportation of the grain of mid-day meal to the petitioners following the minutes and selection list dated 17.6.2014 aforesaid."
Mr. Sudhir Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, in support of the aforementioned prayer has submitted that once a decision was taken to open the tender on 17.6.2014 under the orders of the Collector of the District and the Collector was not present on account of his being busy otherwise, the meeting held under the Chairmanship of the Addl. District Magistrate cannot be faulted either on fact or in law. In this regard he has referred to the impugned order dated 25th July, 2014 and has submitted that the whole process having been conducted by the Tender Committee in a bonafide manner the Collector was wholly unjustified in subsequently cancelling the process of tender and going for a fresh process of tender.
When the aforementioned submissions were made on earlier occasion this Court by an order dated 3.9.2014 had not only directed the respondents to file a counter affidavit but had asked the Collector of Darbhanga District to be personally remain present.
Today Mr. Dinesh Kumar has appeared representing himself to be the Additional District Magistrate and has submitted Patna High Court CWJC No.14930 of 2014 (3) dt.15-09-2014 4 that since the Collector of the District has gone for training programme in the Academy at Masoorie for a period of two months it is he who has been now notified by the State Government to work in place of the Collector of Darbhanga during his absence.
This Court on perusal of the counter affidavit and specially the records would find that on 30th May, 2014 a tender notice was issued which had very clearly stipulated that the offers were to be submitted within 15 days and the offer was to be opened on the next day. The Dealing Clerk, namely, Sheo Kumar, however, got smart and by making obvious cutting in his noting on 31.5.2014 at three places had changed the last date from 14th to 15th June as also the date of opening from 15th to 16th June which is absolutely clear even to a nacked eye. It is true that thereafter when the file had been placed before the Collector on 5.6.2014 he had initially asked for fixing a date, whereafter by his next order dated 6.6.2014 the date was fixed for 17th June, 2014 for holding the meeting of the Selection Committee. The tender notice therefore does not give scope for two interpretations, inasmuch as it is very clear that the last date will be 15th day from the date of publication of the tender notice. That being so, the 15th day was to be 14th of June, 2014 and the tender had to be accordingly opened Patna High Court CWJC No.14930 of 2014 (3) dt.15-09-2014 5 on 15th June irrespective of its being declared as a holiday.
The second aspect which however would go to the root of the matter is that the Collector has been designated by the State Government to conduct process of selection in person. The Additional District Magistrate, therefore, could not have chaired the meeting on 17.6.2014. It is here that the cat has come out of the bag when the authorities have tried to hush up the whole thing that the Collector himself on telephone had authorized to hold the meeting but later on the Addl. District Magistrate had himself in his explanation to the District Magistrate clarified that he was actually misled by his subordinate authorities for holding the meeting on the ground that such order was passed by the District Magistrate.
The whole scenario, therefore, which emerges is that on account of certain misdeeds and misconduct or subordinate officials that the Collector was given a go bye though he was the authority nominated by the State Government to chair the meeting for deciding the tender. The meeting of the Tender Committee on 17.6.2014 therefore had to be either postponed or some orders in writing had to be obtained from the Collector authorizing the Addl. District Magistrate to conduct the meeting for completing selection process of tender.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14930 of 2014 (3) dt.15-09-2014 6
In absence of all these, this Court would find that the Addl. District Magistrate as on 16.6.2014/ 17.6.2014 was a persona non grata who had no authority or jurisdiction to chair the meeting on 17.6.2014. Let it be noted that earlier the State Government in its circular dated 24.5.2011 had authorized the Addl. District Magistrate to conduct such meeting but that power was subsequently taken away by the State Government by authorizing the District Magistrate in person to conduct the meeting as would be evident from the subsequent circular dated 10.12.2011 and 17.8.2012 issued by the Human Resources Development Department. Law in this regard is well settled that a person holding the current charge of the post cannot exercise the power and jurisdiction vested to a particular authority. Reference in this regard may be usefully made to the Full Bench judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Girja Shankar Shukla v. Sub-divisional Officer, Sarda & ors., reported in AIR 1973 M.P. 104, which has also been affirmed by the apex Court in the case of Ramakant Shripad Sinai Advalpalkar vs Union of India & Ors reported in 1991 Supp. (2) SCC 733.
In that view of the matter, this Court would not find any error in the impugned order passed by the Collector in undertaking the fresh process for holding the process of selection for awarding Patna High Court CWJC No.14930 of 2014 (3) dt.15-09-2014 7 contract under the Mid-day Meal Scheme.
It has to be now taken into account that the State Government on account of the Collector of the District proceeding on training programme at Masoorie has specifically nominated and authorized Mr. Dinesh Kumar, the A.D.M. to discharge all the work and function of the Collector of Darbhanga District. In that view of the matter, Mr. Dinesh Kumar can go ahead with the selection process which is now to be conducted by opening the tender on 22nd of September, 2014.
That being so, this application fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.
The personal appearance of Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Collector, Darbhanga is hereby dispensed with.
(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) surendra/-
U