WP(C) No. 847 of 2025 & MC(WP(C)) No. 772 of 2025 Supp. -1 Item Nos. 3-4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP(C) No. 847 of 2025 M/S Assam Supply Syndicate. …Petitioner - Versus - State of Manipur & 2 Ors. …Respondents With MC(WP(C)) No. 772 of 2025 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA O R D E R 17-10-2025 [1] These matters are taken up on mentioning as unlisted item due to urgency involved in the matters. [2] Heard Mr. N. Jotendro, learned senior counsel for the petitioner assisted by Md. Syed Murtaza Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Niranjan Sanasam, learned Government Advocate assisted by Mrs. R.K. Emily, learned Dy. Government Advocate for the State respondents. [3] The petitioner approached this Court for disposal of the representations dated 15-10-2025 submitted by him to the respondents requesting for consideration of his experience as a joint venture partner in executing similar work. It is stated that para 2.4 of the technical experience, the bidder has to submit certificate for experience and the experience certificate of the petitioner dated 11-04-2025 and 18-09-2025 may be considered in evaluation of the bid. [4] On the other hand, Mr. S. Nepolean, learned Government Advocate for the State respondents, has pointed out that the experience of the petitioner is a joint venture and as per clause 2.2 of the NIT, consortiums NINGOM BAM VICTORIA Digitally signed by NINGOMBAM VICTORIA Date: 2025.10.17 16:56:40 +05'30' WP(C) No. 847 of 2025 & MC(WP(C)) No. 772 of 2025 of firms/joint venture are not eligible for bid for applying NIT. [5] However, Mr. N. Jotendro, learned senior counsel for the petitioner clarified that his bid is not as a consortium or joint venture but by the present representations, the petitioner is praying for considering his experience in the joint venture and that the writ petition may be disposed of by passing an innocuous order to consider his representations for considering his experience in the joint venture. [6] Mr. S. Nepolean, learned Government Advocate for the State respondents, submits that this Court may pass an appropriate order but may record the objection of the State that joint venture’s qualifications are not eligible. [7] This Court has considered the material on record and the submissions made at the Bar. The representations have been filed for considering the experience gained by the petitioner as in a joint venture and the petitioner is not applying as a joint venture in terms of the clause 2.2 of the NIT. This Court is of the opinion that the writ petition may be disposed of by directing the respondents to consider and pass a speaking order to the pending representation dated 15-10-2025 submitted by the petitioner within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. [8] The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above direction. [9] It is made clear that this Court does not express any opinion on the merit of the case except for permitting the respondents to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner. [10] MC(WP(C)) No. 772 of 2025 is also disposed of. [11] In the meantime, the financial bid shall not be finalized till the disposal of the representation. JUDGE Victoria