Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010100372025 2025:GAU-AS:5896 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2551/2025 SRI RAJIB HAZARIKA S/O LATE PROBIN HAZARIKA, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT B.P. CHALIHA ROAD, MELACHAKAR, DISTRICT - SIVASAGAR, ASSAM, PIN-785640 VERSUS OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT -5A- 5B, NELSON MANDELA ROAD, VASANT KUNJ, NEW DELHI, 110070 2:CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (MM) CENTRAL LOGISTIC AND PRODUCTION SERVICES PROCUREMENT GROUP CENTRAL PROCUREMENT DEPARTMENT OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 7TH FLOOR NBP GREEN HEIGHTS BKC BANDRA (E) MUMBAI400051. 3:GROUP GENERAL MANAGER (P) SM OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION ROB-1 GROUND FLOOR NAZIRA P.O. AND P.S.- NAZIRA SIVASAGAR PIN- 785685. 4:ASSET MANAGER (ED) ASSAM ASSET OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NAZIRA P.O. AND P.S.- NAZIRA DISTRICT- SIVSAGAR PIN785685. Page No.# 2/5 5:M/S SOUTH ASIA CONSULTANCY PROPRIETOR- SRI. DHARAMSINH RAJPUT 8 402 ORANGE MALL NEAR CHANDHEDA BUS STAND CHANDHEDA AHMEDABAD GUJRAT PIN-382424 6:THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT ICAI BHAWAN POST BOX NO. 7100 INDRAPRASTHA MARG NEW DELHI PIN - 110002 7:THE DIRECTOR (DISCIPLINE) DISCIPLINARY DIRECTORATE THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT OF INDIA ICAI BHAWAN POST BOX NO. 7100 INDRAPRASTHA MARG NEW DELHI PIN110002. 8:THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY DISCIPLINARY DIRECTORATE ICAI BHAWAN C-1 SECTOR - 1 NOIDA UTTAR PRADESH PIN -201301 9:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER 9 DISCIPLINARY DIRECTORATE ICAI BHAWAN C-1 SECTOR - 1 NOIDA UTTAR PRADESH PIN - 201301 10:RAJ ASHOKBHAI PATEL CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT 24 MARKET YARD (APMC) SECOND FLOOR KADI MEHESHANA GUJARAT PIN - 38444 Page No.# 3/5 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D DAS SR. ADV, MS M KAKOTY,R SARMAH Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ONGC, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER Date : 14.05.2025 Heard Mr. D. Das, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. R. Sarmah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. I. Choudhury, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. S. Chakrabarty, learned counsel for the ONGC. Also heard Mr. U. S. Bora, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court after withdrawal of the earlier writ petition, i.e. WP(C) 715/2025, with liberty being given to file afresh, vide order dated 08.05.2025. 3. The petitioner had initially filed WP(C) 715/2025, with regard to the NIT dated 06.06.2024, for hiring of scrapping winch for Assam and Ahmadabad Assets under ONGC. The petitioner’s bid/tender regarding the above NIT was with regard to the Assam Assets only. The petitioner had put to challenge the impugned list dated 03.01.2025 issued by the ONGC, notifying the technically qualified bidders, which included the respondent No. 5, on the ground that the respondent No. 5 was not technically qualified. 4. The petitioner has now approached this Court, on various grounds, one of the grounds being that the documents submitted by the petitioner, which was supposedly certified by a Chartered Accountant, were fabricated documents. In Page No.# 4/5 this regard, he has relied upon the letter dated 09.04.2025 issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and it’s enclosures which are annexed to the writ petition as Annexure-38 (Colly), which purportedly states that the certificates submitted by the respondent No. 5 along with the bid documents were fabricated. Further, the Audit Financial Statement of the respondent No. 5 was also purportedly fabricated. 5. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the said letter dated 09.04.2025 issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, Annexure-38 (Colly) along with its enclosures clearly showed that the financial bid of the respondent No. 5 could not have been accepted by the respondent authorities. He accordingly submits that the work order issued to the respondent No. 5 has to be terminated. 6. Mr. I. Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the ONGC submits that the issue raised by the petitioner by way of this writ petition, has never been brought to the notice of the ONGC, except by way of this writ petition. He submits that if the issue was brought to the notice of the ONGC earlier, the same will be considered and a decision will be taken on the same. 7. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 8. On hearing the learned counsels for the parties and perusing Annexure-38 (Colly), I am of the view that the issue raised by the petitioner should have been brought to the notice of the ONGC, prior to approaching this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inasmuch as, a Writ Court is normally the Court of the last resort, after efficacious alternative remedies have been Page No.# 5/5 exhausted. 9. In view of the fact that the issue raised in relation to Annexure-38 (Colly) has not been brought to the notice of the ONGC earlier, this Court is of the view that the petitioner should submit a representation to the ONGC enclosing Annexure-38 (Colly) and thereby giving an opportunity to the ONGC, to examine the issue raised by the petitioner and to take a decision, as it deems fit and proper. The petitioner is accordingly given the liberty to file a representation before the ONGC with regard to the above issue, which should be done within a period of two days from today. The ONGC should thereafter examine the issue/s raised by the petitioner and take a decision thereon by way of a speaking order, within a period of three weeks, from the date of receipt of the representation along with a copy of the writ petition and this order. The issue regarding the validity of the respondent No.5’s Techno Commercial Bid and all the other issues raised in this writ petition shall remain open. 10. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant