DAVID MISRA V. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/5792/2025

AI Insights

The case involves David Misra, the petitioner, who challenged the decision of the Pradhan, Bulbulchandi Gram Panchayat, Malda (respondent no.3), to reject his technical bid for e-tenders. The rejection was based on the absence of a three-year audited balance sheet, which the petitioner argued was unnecessary as the total work estimate did not exceed Rs.1 crore, the threshold for mandatory audited accounts under Section 44AB of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner also contended that the decision should have been made by a committee authorized by the Artha O Parikalpana Upa-Samity, not by the Pradhan alone. The Block Development Officer's subsequent decision on the matter, which was not challenged in the writ petition, led to the petitioner's decision to withdraw the application with the option to refile.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 669923 (HC-WEST_BENGAL)
• Appeal Type: High Court cases
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Simarul Sekh & anr. -versus- The State of West Bengal & ors. (WPA 3409 of 2025)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, Procurement Manual, 2014
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: ANJAN BHATTACHARYA; ANITA SHAW
• Assessee Lawyers: SATADEEP BHATTACHARYYA
• Keywords: Audited balance sheet; E-Tender; Gram Panchayat; Technical bid; Committee authorized by Artha O Parikalpana Upa-Samity
• Section: 44AB

Judgement Text

"22.05.2025 Ct. no.39 Sl. No.18 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ss CIVIL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE W.P.A. 5792 of 2025 David Misra versus The State of West Bengal & ors. Mr. Satadeep Bhattacharyya Mr. Bipin Ghosh Ms. Sriparna Mitra … for the petitioner Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya Ms. Anita Shaw … for the respondent nos.2 and 3 Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. Despite service none appears on behalf of the State-respondent. This writ petition is filed for cancellation of the decision of the respondent no.3, Pradhan, Bulbulchandi Gram Pahchayat, Malda of rejecting the technical bid submitted by the petitioner pursuant to notice inviting e- tender being Nos.03(e)/BBCGP/2025 and 04(e)/BBCGP/2025 dated 21st January, 2025. Mr. Satadeep Bhattacharyya, learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner participated in the aforesaid notice inviting e-tender in respect of work under serial nos.1, 2, 4, 5, 14 and 15. The petitioner submitted all the relevant documents as required under the aforesaid notice inviting e-tender. However, the 2 technical bid of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that the petitioner failed to submit three years audited balance-sheet. As per Section 44AB of the Income Tax Act, a company having Rs.1 crore turn over is supposed to maintain audited balance-sheet. The entire work estimate specified in the notice inviting e- tender taken together does not exceed Rs.1 crore. Therefore, the submission of audited balance-sheet does not arise. He also indicates that as per Procurement Manual, 2014, the Pradhan of Gram Panchayat cannot take decision and it has to be taken by a Committee authorized by Artha O Parikalpana Upa-Samity. He also relies on an unreported decision of this Hon’ble Court in Simarul Sekh & anr. -versus- The State of West Bengal & ors. (WPA 3409 of 2025). The action of the respondent no.3, the Pradhan, Bulbulchandi Gram Panchayat, Malda has been challenged by the petitioner before the Block Development Officer, Habibpur Development Block, the respondent no.8 by way of a representation dated 25th February, 2025. He seeks for appropriate order. Mr. Anjan Bhattacharya, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.2 and 3 submits at the outset that representation of the petitioner has already been considered by the Block Development Officer, Habibpur Development Block, respondent no.8 and orders have been passed on 3rd 3 March, 2025, which has not been challenged in the present writ petition. The aforesaid order of Block Development Officer has also been communicated to the petitioner. At this stage, Mr. Satadeep Bhattacharyya, learned Advocate for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the application with liberty to file afresh. In view of such submission, the writ petition being WPA 5792 of 2025 stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file afresh. Copy of the order of Block Development Officer, Habibpur Development Block is handed over to the learned Advocate for the petitioner. All connected applications, if any, stand disposed of. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of all necessary legal formalities. (Bivas Pattanayak, J.) "