MUMBAI, 18 August 2007 — The division bench of Chief Justice Swatanter Kumar and Justice Mrs. Ranjana Desai of the Mumbai High Court on Thursday came down heavily on Minister for Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries Anees Ahmed taking a tough stand against his misuse of power in extending the contract of collecting entry tax of three toll centers at Aarey Milk Colony Road without issuing fresh tenders.
Setting aside the contract awarded by the minister to Gharib Nawaz Corporation, the bench said that it “is vitiated in law” and that Anees Ahmed’s action “suffers from the element of arbitrariness and is contrary to business rules.”
Both the judges also stated that Ahmed’s decision to award the contract to Gharib Nawaz Corporation (GNC) “appears to be absolute abuse of power and offends the basic norms of public authority and public accountability.”
The court ordered the state government to form a committee to determine the losses caused to the state exchequer from the decision of Ahmed and the same to be recovered, both from the GNC and Ahmed.
Justices Kumar and Desai delivered the judgment in response to a PIL filed by lawyer and activist Subhash Acharya which had alleged that Gharib Nawab Corporation (GNC), which was given the contract to recover entrance fee from vehicles entering the Aarey Milk Colony from Goregaon, Marol and Powai checkposts from 2002 to 2005, and further got a three-year extension in 2004 without Ahmed inviting fresh tenders.
Citing a 1975 Supreme Court judgment, Justice Kumar and Justice Desai held that the government can’t exclude anybody while awarding public contracts. “The government is government of laws and not of men,” the judges said. “ Ahmed even ignored his department’s advice of not granting the extension, and seek the opinion of the Law and Judiciary Department,” the judges said.
Even in an affidavit filed in the Mumbai High Court on June 28, 2007, the state government has gone on record stating that Ahmed’s order extending GNC contract on Aug. 21, 2004 violated the Maharashtra Government Rules of Business and Instruction.
The state also ascertained that the contract amount for three years was Rs165.8 million with a daily payment of Rs151,000. Although the court found substance in the petition, it said the affidavit was enough to set Ahmed’s order aside.
Also, Ahmed had relaxed a condition that allowed the termination of the contract if the contractor showed incapability to execute his part without his security deposit being refunded. Moreover, he also let GNC hike their rates by 5 percent.
This, the PIL alleged was “an exercise of power causing huge losses to the public exchequer.” “Persons in high positions have to ensure all reasonable care and caution that no loss is caused to the affairs of the government, particularly in terms of money,” the high court observed. “Greater the power to decide, higher is the responsibility to be just and fair.” Stating that the element of arbitrariness was crystal clear, the HC has now directed the state to invite fresh tenders for the contract within one month.
