AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J
The Petitioner herein is before this Court on grounds inter alia that the people of Sumbuk-Kartikey and Lungchok-Kamarey have been facing acute
drinking water shortage for the past several years. That, the Respondent No.2 sanctioned the water supply scheme under the Rural Infrastructure
Development Fund financed by the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) for the said areas. Tenders were issued for
the said work and the Respondent No.3 was awarded the contract. Although the people in the area did not receive drinking water from the works put
to tender which was to have been completed within 24 months from 16-12-2010, the Panchayat and other concerned authorities submitted the
completion report to the Respondent No.2. Consequently, the people in these areas are still deprived of drinking water. Various other complaints were
also raised by the Petitioner pertaining to the quality of work carried out by the Respondent No.3 and it was averred that the fundamental rights
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution to the Petitioner and the people of the area was grossly violated by non-execution of the works.
It is submitted by Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State-Respondents No.1 and 2 that vide an Affidavit dated 30-07-2021 it
has been inter alia mentioned that a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) was called by the Block Administrative Centre (BAC), Sumbuk, South Sikkim, on
11-06-2021 to compete in the bidding within the territorial jurisdiction of the Gram Panchayat where the work is to be executed, giving details of the
work for the purpose of providing drinking water to the areas highlighted by the Petitioner. There was, however, no participation in the bid. Hence, the
Department had decided to carry out the required works in the Sumbuk-Kartikey and Lungchok-Kamarey areas. The works will be for augmentation
and retrofitting of the rural water supply.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that she has no objection to the proposal of the State-Respondents No.1 and 2 as the Department will be
undertaking the relevant works. That, in the light of this development this Petition may be disposed of.
In view of the grounds put forth and the express satisfaction of the Petitioner, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.