Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010073702026 2026:GAU-AS:5285- DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WA/109/2026 M/S WIN POWER INFRACON LLP AND ANR 1ST FLOOR, BASANTA ENCLAVE, DR. B. BARUAH COLLEGE ROAD, ULUBARI -781007, GUWAHATI, ASSAM REPRESENTED BY SHRI AMARENDRA KUMAR TIWARI (POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER OF M/S WIN POWER INFRACON LLP) 2: AMRENDRA KUMAR TIWARI GENERAL MANAGER M/S WIN POWER INFRACON LLP 1ST FLOOR BASANTA ENCLAVE DR. B. BARUAH COLLEGE ROAD ULUBARI -781007 GUWAHATI ASSA VERSUS ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED AND 4 ORS. BIJULEE BHAWAN, PALTAN BAZAR, GUWAHATI, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, DIST - KAMRUP (M), GUWAHATI 2:CHAIRMAN APDCL BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTAN BAZAR DIST- KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI. 3:MANAGING DIRECTOR APDCL BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTAN BAZAR Page No.# 2/4 DIST- KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI. 4:CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (DISTRIBUTION AND SAFETY ) LAR BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTAN BAZAR DIST- KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI 5:CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (AUDIT) BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTAN BAZAR DIST- KAMRUP (M) GUWAHAT For the appellant/petitioner(s) : Mr. K. K. Mahanta, Sr. Advocate Mr. K. M. Mahanta, Advocate Ms. M. Kakati, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. P.N. Goswami, Addl. AG, Assam –B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY 08.04.2026 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ) We have heard Mr. K. K. Mahanta, learned senior Advocate for the appellant/ M/s Win Power Infracon LLP and another, and Mr. P.N. Goswami, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, for the respondents. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 27.03.2026, passed in WP(C) 1632/2026, whereby the learned Single Judge has refused to grant interim relief prayed for by the appellant restraining the respondents from continuing with the fresh tender process, which, the appellant claims, has made their writ petition infructuous. Page No.# 3/4 The appellant, after having been found technically qualified and crossing the financial evaluation, was declared the L-1 bidder. He was issued a Letter of Intent (LOI) which, according to the appellant, was accepted and the appellant was also permitted to submit their requisite Performance Guarantee and Additional Performance Guarantee. It appears that later, while evaluating the bid capacity of the appellant, which was necessitated because of the abnormally low price offered by the appellant in the capacity of a sub-contractor, the bid capacity of the appellant was not found to be up to the mark. The primary contention of the appellant is that this exercise ought not to have been undertaken by the respondents at such a belated stage, when the appellant (bidder) had been declared as L-1 bidder after thorough evaluation of its tender papers and had been permitted to deposit the requisite Performance Guarantee and Additional Performance Guarantee. The apprehension of the appellant is that either another person in the fray would be selected, or the respondents would go for a fresh tender. This was questioned by the appellant before the learned Single Judge, who directed for issuance of notice to the respondents but refused to accede to the prayer of the appellant for grant of interim relief. This Court has been informed that that the writ petition has been directed to be listed before the learned Single Judge for final consideration on 06.05.2026. After some arguments, Mr. Mahanta, learned senior counsel seeks permission to withdraw this appeal with the liberty to the appellant to file Page No.# 4/4 Interlocutory Application before the learned Single Judge with a prayer for fixing an early date or, in the alternative, to pass an order observing that any decision taken by the respondents with regard to the tender process in question, would be subject to the outcome of the writ petition preferred by the appellant. With such leave, the present appeal is permitted to be withdrawn. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed off with the liberty, as aforesaid. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant