Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010114552025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2963/2025 SUROJIT SEN S/O LATE ANIL KUMAR SEN, R/O CHANDICHARAN ROAD, J.P. SARANI, HOUSE NO 19, SILCHAR, P.O. RANGIRKHARI, P.S. SILCHAR, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM,PIN 788005 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS ROAD DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI 6 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER (ROADS) PWRD ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI 3 3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PWRD CACHAR ROAD CIRCLE SILCHAR PIN 788001 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWRD BORKHOLA AND KATIGORAH TERRITORIAL ROAD DIVISION KATIGORAH DIST. CACHAR Page No.# 2/4 ASSAM PIN 78880 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B J GHOSH, MR. A M S MAZUMDER Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PWD, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER 13.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. A.M.S. Mazumder, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam. 2. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner had been given Letter of Acceptance dated:- 07.03.2025, pursuant to the NIT dated 05.09.2024, for “Construction of road from Jellalpore Rymbai Road to Kalaincherra BSF Camp- via-Natanpur Garden L.P. School at Kalaincherra T.E. under RIDF-XXX of NABARD for the year 2024-2025”. 3. The petitioner’s counsel submits that pursuant to the Letter of Acceptance, the petitioner had also submitted the Performance Security of Rs.1,80,000/- and signed the contract agreement with the respondent PWD. The petitioner has however, not been issued the order to proceed with the contract work as on date. He also submits that the petitioner had submitted a representation dated 17.05.2025 requesting the Chief Engineer (Roads) PWRD, Assam, to issue the work order pursuant to the NIT dated 05.09.2024. However, no reply has been given to the petitioner with regard to the petitioner’s representation dated Page No.# 3/4 17.05.2025. He accordingly submits that this writ petition may be disposed of, with a direction to the Chief Engineer (Roads) PWRD, Assam, to take a decision on the petitioner’s representation dated 17.05.2025 and to communicate the same to the petitioner. 4. Mr. B. Gogoi submits that the parawise comments dated 05.06.2025, issued by the Chief Engineer (Roads) PWRD, Assam, has been furnished to him and in paragraph-11 of the parawise comments, it has been stated that the department has decided not to issue the final work order to the petitioner. 5. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 6. Paragraph-11 of the parawise comments dated 05.06.2025 issued by the Chief Engineer (Roads) PWRD, Assam is reproduced hereinbelow : “11. That the department, after assessing all relevant factors and in the interest of project integrity and timely execution, has decided not to issue the final work order, which is a decision well within its contractual and administrative discretion. That the petitioner's claim is not only untenable and premature, but is also vitiated by suppression of material facts and misrepresentation during the tendering process. That in order to avoid project delays, cost escalation, and to prevent further loss to public exchequer, the Department is actively considering engaging another eligible bidder from among the originally qualified tender participants, in accordance with tender terms and public procurement norms.”. 7. The above paragraph-11 of the parawise comments shows that the respondents have decided not to issue the final work order to the petitioner, Page No.# 4/4 thereby cancelling the entire contract agreement. As the respondents have taken a decision not to issue the work order to the petitioner, the formal communication of the decision made by the department should be communicated to the petitioner, within a period of 1 (one) week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant