M.S. Raja v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...

WPA/140/2022 M.S.Raja ... Petitioner Vs.

The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others ... Respondents Mr.Deep Chaim Kabir Mr.Ajith Prasad ... for the petitioner Mr.Ramendu Agarwal ... for the respondents April 29, 2022 [GNC] Item No.1 The petitioner had been granted rights to extract minor mineral as per the quarry plan and at a site earmarked by the Deputy Commissioner, North and Middle Andaman, Mayabunder. The petitioner participated in the e-auction and the quarry Block-H, under survey No.4/1/P area 0.25 hectare situated at Harinagar village, Mayabunder Tehsil, North and Middle Andaman District was allotted to the petitioner. Accordingly, lease was executed and the petitioner had deposited the entire bid amount, performance guarantee as also royalty.

As the area in respect of which such extraction was permitted, did not have enough material, the petitioner approached the authority for further clarification and orders allowing the petitioner to extract the amount that was available at the site, instead of the contracted amount. The petitioner also prayed for refund of the excess amount already deposited by the petitioner.

petitioner moved this High Court. This court directed the authorities to consider the grievances of the petitioner and pass necessary orders in accordance with law, on the petitioner's representation.

Another successful bidder, namely, Naresh Halder also approached this court with similar prayers. Naresh Halder had been granted the right to quarry in respect of another block. This court passed an order allowing Naresh Halder to extract the amount that was available and the authorities were directed to repay the additional amount that was deposited. It is alleged that although the direction of the High Court with regard to Naresh Halder was complied with by the authority by an order dated May 11, 2021, the grievances of the petitioner were not redressed. The petitioner submits that he is similarly situated as Naresh Halder. The authority could not have taken contrary stands in respect of the two bidders who were standing on the same footing and who were permitted to quarry minor minerals under identical terms and conditions. Thus orders have been prayed for, before this Court.

Mr.Agarwal, learned Advocate appearing for the respondents submits that after the order of the High Court was passed and the prayer of the petitioner was not entertained by the authority, three e-auctions were held for quarrying of minor minerals in respect of the relevant quarry block, and the petitioner had participated in one of the said e-auctions. The contract between the petitioner and the authority had expired long time ago. The petitioner had participated in one of such e-

auctions. Thus, he submits that the allegations made in the writ petition do not survive as the petitioner had waived his right to challenge the order dated October 8, 2021 by which the prayers of the petitioner had been turned down.

The court finds that the reason as to why the prayer of the petitioner had been turned down were that the terms and conditions of the e-auction by which the petitioner was selected as a successful bidder, did not provide for such contingency and the authority was not empowered to take any steps with regard to the prayers of the petitioner.

The prayers of the petitioner was further turned down on the ground that the bidder was supposed to satisfy himself about the availability of the minerals before participating in the eauction. This court finds that the claim of Naresh Halder, however, was allowed as per the direction of the High Court and it is alleged that the petitioner ought to have been given the same relief, if Naresh Halder could have been granted the reliefs similar to those prayed for by the petitioner. The prayers of the petitioner was turned down by the Assistant Commissioner (HQ), North and Middle Andaman, Mayabunder. The authority did not explain why the petitioner did not deserve to be treated equally with Naresh Halder.

Aggrieved, the petitioner has approached the higher authority, namely, the Chief Secretary, Andaman and Nicobar Administration, Port Blair by a representation dated October 21, 2021. A detailed representation has been made and the

petitioner has also elaborated the reasons as to why the petitioner must be treated at par with Naresh Halder. Such representation is pending. The same has not been disposed of in accordance with law.

This court does not go into the merits of the claims and counterclaims of the parties. However, the court directs the Chief Secretary, Andaman and Nicobar Administration to dispose of the said representation dated October 21, 2021 in accordance with law upon considering the materials before him and upon allowing the petitioner to agitate his grievances along with all supporting documents. The authority shall pass a reasoned order upon hearing the petitioner as also Naresh Halder and any other persons who may be involved in the entire process including the Assistant Commissioner, who had passed the orders dated October 8, 2021 and May 11, 2021. The authority shall categorically indicate whether the petitioner and Naresh Halder deserved equal treatment or not.

Such order shall be passed within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order, but mandatorily before any eauction with respect to site i.e. Block-H, under survey No.4/1/P area 0.25 hectare situated at Harinagar village, Mayabunder Tehsil, North and Middle Andaman District is held by the authority, if not already held or notified.

The order should be communicated to the petitioner within the aforementioned period.

This court has not gone into the merits of the claim and counterclaim of the parties.

With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

The parties to act on the server copy of this order. (Shampa Sarkar, J.)