Bhaskar Bhatacharya, J. - (1.) An unsuccessful writ petitioner being dissatisfied with the order of the learned Single Judge dated 1st December, 2005 has preferred the present mandamus-appeal.
(2.) In the writ application, the appellant challenged the decision of the respondent-authority in selecting the private-respondent as the successful bidder for the purpose of grant of lease of a large water area, notwithstanding the fact that the appellant was the highest bidder.
(3.) The following facts are not in dispute: (a) The respondent No. 5 by his memo dated 17th November, 2003 invited tenders for the purpose of selection of a lessee for cultivating fish in a water area called 'Nehali Beel' at mouza Hatia for the annual rental of Rs. 1,10,502/-, inter alia, specifying that the tender paper would be sold on 2nd December, 2003 from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. and the same should be submitted in his office on 3rd December, 2003 and the tender would be opened on the same day. (b) In compliance with the aforesaid memo dated 17th November, 2003, the appellant took a tender form and participated in the said process of tender by submitting the same on 3rd December. 2003. (c) There is no dispute that there were three applicants, namely. (1) Blue Revolution Fishery who proposed to pay annually Rs. 1,15,000/-, (2) Raigang Refugee Fishermen's Co-operative Society Limited, the private respondent herein who offered Rs. 1,30,001/- and (3) Blue Revolution Fishermen's Co-operative Society Limited, the one represented by the appellant who offered Rs. 1,61,000/-. (d) In the past, the private-respondent No. 10 filed a writ application being W.P. No. 18997 (W) of 2003 in connection with the said process of tender where the present appellant was subsequently added. In the said writ application there was an ad interim order passed on 28th November. 2003 restraining the State-respondents from opening the said tender and as such, the process could not be completed in view of pendency of the said writ-application. Subsequently, on 17th December, 2004 the said interim order was vacated and ultimately, on 20th May, 2005 the said writ application was withdrawn by the private respondent. (e) At last, by the order impugned in the writ application, the respondent- authority has selected the private respondent for the said lease by a reasoned order pursuant to a direction given by this Court in an earlier writ application filed by the writ petitioner. (f) In the order impugned, the concerned officer has assigned three different reasons for selecting the private respondent. First, in view of the decision of the Directorate of Fishery, West Bengal dated 8th June, 2004 thereby taking a policy decision that 10 to 12 men's primary cooperative society should not be allowed to take part in any open tender for settlement of water bodies held by the Fishery Department as well as the Land and Land Reforms Department, the writ petitioner became disqualified. Secondly, it is stated that the concerned water area being a huge area of 61.39 acres and the private respondent's society being formed by more than 1000 fishermen whereas the appellant's society being only 10/12- men association, it is desirable that the lease should be allotted to private respondent whose members are all fishermen by occupation. Thirdly, as per provision of Rule 272 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Manual, 1991, if there is only one Primary Fishermen Co-operative Society in the locality, the settlement should be made with the local functional society on the basis of the estimated rent determined and in such event, no tender need be invited and the private respondent having fallen within such category, even there was no necessity of floating a tender.;