WP(C) 895/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr. S Kataki, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. MK Choudhury, Se nior Standing Counsel, Education Department being assisted by Ms. M Gogoi Medhi, Advocate. The petitioners are before this Court with the apprehension that the contract fo r supply and printing works for the implementation of the Centrally sponsored sc heme titled Saakshar Bharat Mission Scheme, 2012 (for short hereafter referred to as the Scheme) through the State Literacy Mission Authority in Assam, having regard to the attendant facts and circumstances are likely to be awarded withou t resorting to a fair, objective and transparent public participatory process as is constitutionally mandated in the matter of distribution of State largesse. The petitioner No. 1 is a Private Limited Company having it is registered office in the district of Kamrup, Assam and is engaged in the business of printing and supply of articles to various departments of the Government of Assam as well as private establishments and, thus, claims to be interested to partake in the afo rementioned Scheme. They had approached this Court earlier with WP(C) No.5419/20 10 airing the same concern vis-a-vis the allotment of printing works of various forms as a preparatory step for the implementation of the scheme involved. There in, though the State respondents claimed that a Notice Inviting Tender had been published in the issue dated 26.08.2010 of the local daily, viz, Janasadharan , it prima-facie transpired that though such notice had appeared in some of the c opies of the same issue of that daily, it was missing in others. In view of the above disclosure, this Court vide its order dated 01.10.2010, while issuing rule , in the interim, directed the respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 therein not to proceed w ith the process initiated by the said NIT. Thereafter, the State respondents vid e an interlocutory application registered as MC No.3690/2010, had conveyed their decision to cancel the said NIT. The aforementioned writ petition as well as th e miscellaneous application are still pending for final disposal. In this background, while Mr. Kataki, has submitted that it would be appropriate that necessary directions be issued to the State respondents to award/settle th e contractual works for the supply and printing under the aforementioned scheme through a transparent process permitting public participation, Mr. Choudhury, on instructions has maintained that there can be no dispute to such requirement an d that the State respondents while allotting the above works under the Scheme wo uld assuredly resort to a public participatory process a required in law. In the above view of the matter, for the present, this Court is of the view that the petitioners ought not to entertain the apprehension as expressed in the ins tant petition. It would be the solemn obligation of the State respondents to ens ure that the process for awarding of the aforementioned works in the execution o f the Scheme by the SLMA be fair, objective and transparent so as to admit parti cipation of the eligible members of the public. Needless to say, the State respondents would conduct the process in accordance w ith law and informed with reason, objectivity and public interest. The petition stands disposed in the above terms. No costs.