Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)Rupali Begum vs The State Of West Bengal And Others on 25 August, 20201\n\n\nS/l.1.\n\nBpg\n\n\nAugust 25,\n2020\n\n\n                      In the High Court at Calcutta\n                       Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction\n                               Appellate Side\n                           (Via video Conference)\n\n\n\n                      W.P. No.6674(W) of 2020\n                              With\n                       CAN 5543 of 2020\n\n\n\n                     Rupali Begum\n                                Versus\n               The State of West Bengal and others\n\n\n             Mr. Sabir Ahmed,\n             Mr. Shraman Sarkar.\n                          ...for the petitioner.\n\n\n             Mr. Kamalesh Bhattacharya,\n             Mr. Aninda Bhattacharya.\n                        ...for the proposed added respondent.Mr.   Sakya Sen,\n             Mr.   S.K. Gupta,\n             Mr.   Hasibul Islam,\n             Mr.   V. Acharyya....for the Murshidabad Zilla Parishad.Mr. Samrat Sen,\n             Mr. Amitava Das....for the State.2The petitioner has come up with a contention that the date\n\nfor closing the tender process under challenge was fixed today at\n\n2.00 p.m.     The matter was reached by this Court not before 2.20\n\np.m. today.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the\n\npetitioner has a valid case in the writ petition as the petitioner was\n\nunfairly disqualified from participating in the tender without\n\nindicating any reason, despite having filed all the necessary\n\ndocuments as per the corresponding Notice Inviting Tender (NIT).On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-\n\nauthorities submits that there was a glaring mistake in submission\n\nof the necessary papers by the petitioner inasmuch as the Bank\n\nSolvency Certificate, which is a necessary requirement for the tender,\n\nwas not submitted by the petitioner.Relying on paragraph 27 of the writ petition, learned\n\ncounsel for the petitioner controverts such allegation and submits\n\nthat the petitioner has categorically stated therein that all necessary\n\ndocuments were submitted by the petitioner, as specified in the NIT.However, since by now the auction is supposed to be over\n\nas per schedule, unwarranted consequences may follow if an ad\n\ninterim order is passed at this stage.      Moreover, in view of the\n\ncategorical factual controversy raised on the point of non-submission\n\nof all necessary documents by the petitioner, which is specifically3taken by the respondent-authorities, it would be unfair to take up\n\nthe writ petition for disposal without granting an opportunity to the\n\nrespondents to controvert the allegations made in the writ petition.Accordingly, the respondents are directed to file their\n\naffidavit(s)-in-opposition within ten days from date.      Affidavit-in\n\nreply, if any, to be filed within three days thereafter.Let the matter appear before the appropriate Bench taking\n\nup such matters at the earliest available date after the aforesaid time\n\nschedule is exhausted.Liberty to mention for inclusion in the list is given to the\n\nparties.When the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr. Kamalesh\n\nBhattacharya, learned counsel, appears and submits that he has\n\ninstruction to appear in the matter on behalf of some of the\n\ncandidates who participated in the tender process in respect of the\n\n'Ferry Ghat's under contention as well as some other 'Ferry Ghats'.\n\nHowever, without any specific averment in that regard coming on\n\nrecord, the participation of such outsiders in the writ petition cannot\n\nbe permitted at this stage. However, it will be open to the clients of\n\nMr. Bhattacharya to apply formally for being added as parties to the\n\npresent writ petition before the next returnable date and to mention\n\nsuch application for inclusion in the list along with the main writ4petition.    If any such application is made, no observation made\n\nherein would affect the fate of the same.Needless to say, the result of the tender under challenge\n\nshall be subject to the result of the writ petition.(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J. )