WP(C) 4306/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE. BD AGARWAL Heard Mr. R. De, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. J. Bora, learned counse l for the respondent Nos.2,3 and 4, IWT Department and Ms. B. Hazarika, learned Govt. counsel for the State respondent No.1 The petitioner’s case is that Aphalamukh-Neamati Ferry Service was settled with the respondent No.5 for the period of one year vide order dated 10.5.2011. However, the respondent No.5 (lessee) failed to deposit the instalme nts within seven days as required by the terms and conditions of the NIT as well as contract agreement. Clause 8 of the settlement order prescribes that the lessee must take over the ferry service within seven days from the date of issue of the let ter failing which the authority shall have the discretion to forfeit the earnest money and settle the ferry with the next highest bidder. In my considered opin ion, the aforesaid provisions in the terms and conditions gives the discretion t o the authority to cancel the agreement and make settlement with the next highes t bidder but it is not mandatory. In other words, the settling authority can ext end the time for deposit of the instalment money and other documents. At the sa me time, next highest bidder cannot have the legal right to claim the settlemen t just because the successful tenderer could not deposit the instalment money wi thin the initial period. To-day, learned Standing counsel, IWTD submitted that the last d ate fixed for deposit of the money was 6.8.2011 and in the meanwhile the respon dent No.5 has already deposited the money and other documents and he has taken o ver the possession of the ferry. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this writ petit ion and consequently the same stands dismissed.