June 30, 2026 (23) ARDR WPA 14684 of 2026 Hasibul Sekh @ Basibul Sk Vs. The State of West Bengal & ors. Adv. Anjan Bhattachayya, Adv. Sk. Abumusa, …for the petitioner. Adv. Robiul Islam, Adv. Raju Mondal, Adv. Jayed Hossain, Adv. Masooq Rahaman, …for the respondent no.3. Adv. Tapati Sinha, Adv. Suman Chattopadhyay, …for the State. Report submitted by the State is taken on record. The petitioner has assailed the notice inviting e- auction floated by the Executive Officer, Domkal Panchayat Samity on 11th June, 2026 on the ground that the said notice contains two requirements viz. valid tender license (ferry business) and experience of successfully running ferry ghats for minimum three years to be submitted. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner does not possess the said license/certificate, he is unable to participate in the tender. The tender notice has been issued by the Executive Officer including the said two requirements so that no individual can participate in the same and it is open only to business houses. Learned counsel places reliance on an order passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in WPA 378 of 2025 on 7th January, 2025 dealing with a similar issue. It appears from the report submitted by the State and is also on behalf of the Panchayat Samity that 2 pursuant to an order passed by this Court in WPA 378 of 2025, the Artha Sanstha Unnayan O Parikalpana Sthayee Samity of Domkal samity convened a meeting on 11th June, 2026 and resolved that nineteen ferry ghats would be settled through a transparent e-auction strictly in terms of this Court’s order and applicable statutory provisions. The Panchayat samity authorised the executive officer of the samity to float the e-auction notice on behalf of the samity. The two criteria for participation in the auction as pointed out by the petitioner are part and parcel of the e-auction notice. Learned counsel for the State submits that besides business houses, the private individuals have also participated in the auction. Incorporation of conditions/criteria in an auction notice is the sole prerogative of the Panchayat samity and does not call for intervention of the Court. The order referred to by the petitioner deals with a situation where the executive officer of the samity floated the auction notice without being authorised by the Panchayat samity. The fact situation in the said case can be distinguished from that of the present matter. Upon consideration of the submission made on behalf of the parties as well as the material on record this Court is of the view that the executive officer of the samity has floated the auction notice in terms of the resolution taken by the samity on 11th June, 2026. The two requirements of possessing a valid trade license and 3 experience of successfully running ferry ghat for minimum three years are part and parcel of the notice and cannot be said to be illegal, irregular or in contravention of the relevant provisions of law merely because the petitioner does not possess the said qualification. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to hold that the writ petition is devoid of any merit and is liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall however, be no order as to costs. Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the petition are deemed not to have been admitted. Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Suvra Ghosh, J.)