While supporting the judgment of the Gauhati High Court impugned in these appeals, Mr. Altaf Ahmed, learned senior companynsel, broadened the scope of his submissions in companytending that the very companycept of fixing a viable price range was improper and was capable of misuse.
As will appear from the materials on record, in all 8 tenders were received pursuant to the said NIT dated 29th January, 2005 and the same were opened in the presence of the tenderers on 11th March, 2005.
One M s. Abhinandan Trading P Ltd. quoted a rate of Rs.18.95 per LPL for award of the companytract and M s. Rangpur Trading Company Ltd. quoted a rate of Rs.17.11 per LPL.
The State Government was directed to take a fresh decision in accordance with law and without any further delay.
In the said report submitted to the State Government, the Commissioner of Excise worked out the viable reasonable rate for supply of potable alcohol rectified spirit to the excise warehouse at Tinsukia at Rs.18.23 per LPL.
Ultimately, the companytract was awarded to M s. Rangpur Trading Company P Ltd. Such grant of companytract to M s. Rangpur Trading Company Ltd. was challenged by M s. Satya Capital Services P Ltd. by way of Writ Petition, being No.5305/2005, and also by M s. Abhinandan Trading P Ltd. by way of Writ Petition, being No.5132/2005.
4731/2006 Arising out of SLP No.24565 24566/2005 M s. Rangpur Trading Co. P Ltd. Appellant Versus M s. Abhinandan Trading P Ltd. Ors.
The learned Single Judge allowed the said writ petitions and set aside the grant of companytract in favour of M s. Rangpur Trading Company P Ltd. upon holding that such grant did number disclose any logical, acceptable and or reasonable basis.
Respondents ALTAMAS KABIR, J. Leave granted.
The stand of the State Government is that the said viable reasonable rate was worked out by the Commissioner of Excise after taking into companysideration the various factors referred to in Clause 28 of the NIT.
The aforesaid judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 27th September, 2005, was challenged by way of three separate appeals one by the State of Assam, being Writ Appeal No.585/2005, and the other two by the successful tenderer, M s. Rangpur Trading Company P Ltd., being Writ Appeal Nos.
The remaining five tenders were forwarded to the State Government for companysideration.
After processing the same, the Commissioner of Excise submitted his report to the State Government on 10th May, 2005 in which he found three of the said tenders to be defective.
Dr.Singhvi companycluded on the numbere that the procedure evolved for the companyputation of a viable range was fair and transparent and was number meant to favour any individual and that the three different prices quoted by the three short listed applicants, in fact, companyprised the price range companytemplated in clause 28 of the N.I.T. He urged that the judgment of the learned Single Judge was based on the sole companysideration that instead of fixing a viable price range, the Commissioner of Excise had fixed a rate of Rs.18.23 per LPL, which according to the learned Single Judge vitiated the entire process.
In addition it was stated that after having been awarded the companytract, the appellant had been companytinuing to supply potable spirit to the Government of Assam at its Tinsukia Excise Warehouse in terms of the companytract and numberwithstanding the decision of the Gauhati High Court, it had companytinued to make such supplies in view of the interim order passed by this Court on 2nd December, 2005.
24/ per LPL, but the same had number been accepted and the companytract had been awarded to M s. Rangpur Trading Company P Ltd. at the rate of Rs.17.11 per LPL.
Arising out of SLP No.23889/2005 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
The estimated annual companysumption of companyntry spirit in the area companyered by the Tinsukia Warehouse was companytemplated by the Notice Inviting Tender NIT to be approximately 15,60,000.000 London Proof Litre for short LPL .
On 29th January, 2005, tenders were invited by the State of Assam under Rule 91 of the Assam Excise Rules, 1945 for the granting of exclusive privilege of supplying potable alcohol rectified spirit Gr.
The viable range will be determined on the basis of analysis of companyt price, export duty, transportation companyt etc.
I to its excise warehouse at Tinsukia for a period of three years from the date of settlement.
Clause 28 of the NIT reads as follows Contract will be companysidered to the suitable valid tenderer in the viable range for smooth and companytinuous supply of Spirit as may be recommended by the Commissioner of Excise, Assam with the approval of Government.
Pursuant to the said NIT, one M s. Satya Capital Services P Ltd. submitted its tender quoting an amount of Rs.15.10 per LPL for award of the companytract.
by the Commissioner of Excise, Assam.
Since all the three Special Leave Petitions arise out of the companymon judgment of the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court, in the three Writ Appeals referred to hereinbefore, they have been taken up for hearing and disposal together and special leave has been granted in all the three matters.
The three Writ Appeals having been filed against the companymon judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 27th September, 2005 in W.P. No.5132/05 and 5305/05, they were taken up for hearing and disposal together and were disposed of by the Division Bench by a companymon judgment and order dated 6th October, 2005.
Dr. Singhvis submissions were adopted by learned companynsel appearing on behalf of the appellant in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP No.24565 24566/05.
The State of Assam has filed SLP No.23889/2005 against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court affirming the judgment of the learned Single Judge allowing the Writ Petitions filed by M s. Satya Capital Services Ltd. and M s. Abhinandan Trading Company P Ltd. M s. Rangpur Trading Company P Ltd., whose companytract had been quashed by the learned Single Judge, has filed two Special Leave Petitions, namely, SLP Nos.24565 and 24566/2005.
581 and 582 of 2005.
