Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010126622022 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4308/2022 THE SAGAR MOTORS GATE NO. 116, AP KOPLA, TQ, LATUR, DISTRICT- LATUR, MAHARASTRA- 413512. REPRESENTED BY SRI UTTAM BHATTACHARYYA. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:GUWAHATI MUNICIPALITY CORPORATION PANBAZAR GUWAHATI- 781001. 3:THE COMMISSIONER GUWAHATI MUNICIPALITY CORPORATION PANBAZAR GUWAHATI- 781001 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Advocates for the petitioner(s) : Mr. R Goswami Advocates for the respondent(s) : Mr. P Nayak Page No.# 2/3 Additional Advocate General, Assam Date of hearing & judgment : 18.07.2025 JUDGMENT & ORDER(ORAL) Heard Mr. R Goswami, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. P Nayak, the learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, who appears on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3. 2. The petitioner herein has challenged the rejection of the bids by a joint venture consisting of the petitioner and another on the ground that the petitioner’s partner with whom the petitioner formed the joint venture was a trust. 3. It is relevant to take note of that the joint venture is not the petitioner in the present proceedings. Further to that, a perusal of the entire pleadings would show that there is no mention as to what and how the joint venture or even the name of the joint venture was formed. 4. Considering the same, in the opinion of this Court that the petitioner alone does not have a locus standi to challenge the rejection of the bid so submitted by the joint venture in absence of the joint venture being a party to the present proceedings. 5. In addition to that, this Court also in public interest would not like to interfere with the instant proceedings taking into account that the work had already been started pursuant to the work order issued and it is to be Page No.# 3/3 completed by July 2026. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant