WP(C) 3960/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr. SC Biswas, Advocate assisted by Mr. AK Hussain, Advocate for the petit ioner and Mr. G Soren, learned State Counsel, Assam. For the order, which is proposed to be passed, it is not considered essential to issue formal notice. Briefly stated the facts necessary for the disposal of the petition, at the stag e, are that the petitioner, Hatidhura Anchalik Panhayat, Hatidhura had issued an NIT for settlement, inter alia, of the Hatidhura Go-Hat for the term 01.07.2010 to 30.06.2011, indicating therein the Government estimated value thereof to be Rs. 1, 55, 000.00. In response to the said NIT a number of tenderers participat ed and on the completion of the process from the end of the Anchalik Panchayat a s required in law, the proceedings were forwarded to the Zilla Parishad, Dhubri for confirmation thereof. According to the petitioner, the highest valid bid wa s of Rs. 22, 01, 502.00, which was several multiples in excess of the Government estimated value as disclosed in the NIT. The above notwithstanding, by the imp ugned WT Message dated 30.06.2010 of the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad , Dhubri, the petitioner has been directed to re-tender the above market on the ground that the highest bid value fetched by it is less than the Government bid value of 2009-2010 and that a police case is pending in connection therewith. Contending that the above grounds are factually unfounded and incorrect, in the meantime, the petitioner has submitted, inter alia, a representation before the Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Assam, Panchayat and Rural Development , Dispur, Guwahati on 06.07.2010 ventilating its grievances and seeking the inte rvention of the said authority for redress. As the said representation remains unattended as on date, the petitioner is before this Court. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a consideration of the p leaded facts and the documents annexed to this petition as well as considering t he nature of the reliefs prayed for and the factual probe that would be called f or to set at rest the controversy, it is construed expedient to close this proce eding with a direction to the aforementioned authority to take an appropriate de cision on the petitioner’s representation after hearing the both sides and with reference to the contemporaneous official records. Ordered accordingly. As it has been stated by the petitioner that the settlement term is going to com mence from 01.07.2010, the process indicated hereinabove, should be completed wi thin a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. The petition stands disposed in these terms. No costs.