Ujjal Bhuyan, J This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.3.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 297/2012. 2. Relevant facts necessary for adjudication of the case are briefly set out hereunder. 3. Matter relates to settlement of a fishery called Group No.1 Dhar Brahmaputra Fishery of Dhubri district ('Fishery' hereafter). First appellant is a registered fishery co-operative society (appellant society) and the second appellant is its Secretary. Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri issued a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) dated 16.12.2009 inviting sealed tenders from eligible parties for settlement of the fishery for a period of seven years. It was stated that the tenders would be accepted till 2 p.m of 20.1.2010 and at 3 p.m. of the same day, the tenders would be opened. As per clause 4 of the NIT, the tenderers were required to submit along with the tenders, amongst other documents, the following : "(a) Fishing experience Certificate, (b) Bakijai clearance Certificate, (c) Scheduled Caste certificate/Maimal Community Certificate and certificate of actual fisherman, (d) Postal Order/Cheque/Bank Draft of Rs. 10, (e) Revenue deposit of 15% of the Government yearly value, (f) Society Registration Certificate, (g) Tax clearance Certificate, (h) Photo of the person authorized to submit tender on behalf of the society, (i) A copy of the Balance Sheet of the Society, (j) List of name, address and age of the members of the society." 4. In response to the said NIT, all together 7 parties submitted tender, including appellant society and respondent No. 7 society (M/s. Gauripur Co-operative Fishery Society Ltd.). Tenders were opened on 21.1.2010. Seven tenderers had submitted tender. Bid offered by appellant society was Rs. 98,00,000 which was the highest whereas bid offered by respondent No. 7 society was Rs. 23,94,707, which was the 4th highest bid. 5. Appellant society did not submit the list of members along with its tender. According to the appellant society, it had submitted an application dated 18.1.2010 before the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Dhubri for furnishing a copy of the list of its members, which was furnished to it only on 22.1.2010. On that day itself, appellant society submitted a copy of the said list to the Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri with a request to accept the same. 6. On that day itself, appellant society submitted a copy of the said list to the Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri with a request to accept the same. 6. As the authority proceeded with the settlement process without considering the document submitted on 22.1.2010, appellant society instituted WP(C) No. 872/2011 before this court seeking a direction to the respondents not to reject the tender of the appellant society on the ground of non-submission of list of members along with the tender and to consider the tender of the appellant society on its own merit. Contention of the appellant society was that non-submission of the list of members along with the tender was a curable defect, which was cured when it was submitted immediately after opening of tenders. 7. This court by the judgment and order dated 22.11.2011 took the view that the said writ petition was pre-mature as the settling authority was yet to take a decision. Settling authority was directed to proceed with the settlement process by considering the tenders of all the tenderers in accordance with law and, thereafter, to pass necessary order of settlement. 8. Pursuant thereto, Secretary to the Government of Assam, Fishery Department passed the order dated 26.12.2011 settling the fishery with respondent No. 7 society for 7 years at its bid value of Rs. 23,94,707. 9. The above settlement order was put to challenge by the appellants in WP(C) No. 297/2012. Two other unsuccessful tenderers had also filed two separate writ petitions challenging the said order of settlement. All the three writ petitions were heard together by the learned Single Judge and by the common judgment and order dated 21.3.2013, all the three writ petitions were dismissed. Since the present appeal arises out of WH(C) No. 297/2012 filed by the appellants, the deliberation will be confined only to the discussions and findings of the learned Single Judge relating to the said writ petition. 10. Heard Mr. M. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned Government Advocate, Assam for the State respondents. Also heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned senior counsel appearing for respondent No. 7. 11. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the bid offered by the appellant society was the highest. Therefore, it would have been in the public interest to have considered the tender of the appellant society. Also heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned senior counsel appearing for respondent No. 7. 11. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the bid offered by the appellant society was the highest. Therefore, it would have been in the public interest to have considered the tender of the appellant society. Membership list could not be submitted along with the tender as it was belatedly furnished by the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, over whom the appellants had no control. Non-submission of membership list was a curable defect and if such a defect was allowed to be cured, no prejudice would have been caused to any of the parties. In fact, it would have furthered the cause of public interest as acceptance of the bid of appellant society would have resulted in fetching higher revenue. Learned counsel has placed reliance on an order dated 29.9.2011 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in WA No. 294/2011 in support of his submission. He, therefore, submits that the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge as well as the impugned order of settlement should be quashed and the settling authority should be directed to settle the fishery with the appellant society, being the highest bidder. 12. Submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants have been opposed by the learned State counsel as well as by Mr. Choudhury, learned senior counsel for respondent No. 7. It is submitted that appellant society not only failed to submit membership list but also other relevant documents, including the certificate certifying that appellant society comprises of 100% Scheduled Caste actual fishermen. These documents fall in the criteria of essential qualification which needs to be strictly enforced. As there was non-compliance with the essential qualification criteria, settling authority was justified in rejecting the tender of the appellant society. As the bid of respondent No. 7 society was valid in all respects and was the highest amongst the valid bidders, settling authority rightly settled the fishery with respondent No. 7 society. They, therefore, contend that the judgment of the learned Single Judge does not suffer from any infirmity and seeks dismissal of the appeal. 13. Submissions made have been considered. 14. Before proceeding further, relevant portion of the settlement order dated 26.12.2011 may be referred to, which is quoted hereunder : "Altogether, seven Nos. They, therefore, contend that the judgment of the learned Single Judge does not suffer from any infirmity and seeks dismissal of the appeal. 13. Submissions made have been considered. 14. Before proceeding further, relevant portion of the settlement order dated 26.12.2011 may be referred to, which is quoted hereunder : "Altogether, seven Nos. of tender has submitted there tender papers in favour of their Societies for settlement of Gr. No. 1 Dhar Brahmaputra Fishery of Dhubri District which are as follows : Name of tendererAmount offered for seven years (1) M/s. Khoraghat Gulihara FCS Ltd.Rs. 98,00,000 (2) M/s. Jogighopa Meen SS Ltd.Rs. 79,34,659 (3) M/s. Kachudola FCS Ltd.Rs. 54,39,773 (4) M/s. Gauripur Co-op Fishery Society Ltd.Rs. 23,94,707 (5) M/s. Manash Padmabari Jingiram FCS Ltd.Rs. 22,78,970 (6) M/s. Dakhin Salmara Matshyajibi FCS Ltd.Rs. 21,88,970 (7) M/s. Dharnad Brahmaputra FCS Ltd.Rs. 19,97,030 M/s. Khoraghat Gulihara FCS Ltd. has offered the highest bid value of Rs. 98,00,000 for seven years for settlement of the fishery, but the society has not submitted 100% actual SC fishermen Certificate along with the tender proposal. Further, the tender Committee of the District Administration referred that the Society has not submitted three other relevant documents. M/s. Jogighopa Meen S.S. Ltd. has offered second highest bid value as stated above, whereas the Society has not submitted the neighbourhood Certificate and fishing experience certificate. M/s. Kachudola FCS Ltd. has offered third highest bid value as shown above, but Society is resides in the other District. M/s. Gauripur Co-op Fishery Society Ltd. has offered fourth highest bid value arid submitted all required certificate along with tender paper for settlement of the fishery. M/s. Manash Padmabari Jingiram FCS Ltd. has offered fifth highest bid value as above but the Society is resides in the other District. M/s. Dharnad Brahmaputra FCS Ltd. has offered bid value of Rs. 19,97,030 as lowest tendered and submitted documents. On reflecting the above, it is observed that M/s. Gauripur Co-op Fishery Society Ltd. has submitted all required materials along with the tender papers for settlement of the fishery in question, whereas other three highest bidder than the Society has not submitted required materials and as such their tender proposal could not be considered and in view of above, the tender proposal of M/s. Gauripur Co-op Fishery Society Ltd. is accepted. Hence, the Governor of Assam in exercise of the power conferred under rule 12 of the Assam Fishery Rules, 2005 (as amended) is pleased to settle Gr. No. 1 Dhar Brahmaputra Fishery of Dhubri District for seven years with M/s. Gauripur Co-op Fishery Society Ltd. at their bid value of Rs. 23,94,707 only subject to observance of usual terms and conditions laid down in the Fishery Rules." 15. It is thus seen that though the bid offered by the appellant society was the highest, it had not submitted 100% actual Scheduled Caste fishermen certificate along with the tender. The tender Committee also indicated that the appellant society had not submitted three other relevant documents. 16. In the case of Poddar Steel Corporation v. Ganesh Engineering Works and Ors., (1991) 3 SCC 273 , hon'ble Supreme Court held that in a tender process there could be two categories of qualification criteria-essential and ancillary or subsidiary. Essential qualification criteria needs to be rigidly enforced, but ancillary or subsidiary requirement need not be regidly followed. 17. We have already noticed the documents which were required to be submitted by the parties along with the tender. This is a settlement under Rule 12 of the Assam Fishery Rules, 2005 (as amended). As per the requirement of the said Rule, the tenderer, which may be a Co-operative Society or a non-Government organization or a self help group, must be formed with 100% actual fishermen belonging to the Scheduled Caste or Maimal community of erstwhile Cachar district and it must be in the neighbourhood of the fishery. 18. In the course of the proceedings of the earlier writ petition, i.e., WP(C) No. 872/2011 as well as of the related writ petition, i.e., WP(C) No. 297/2012, it was brought on record that the appellant society did not submit the following documents along with the tender : "(i) Members list of the society, (ii) 100% scheduled caste actual fishermen certificate, (iii) Fishing experience certificate, (iv) Approved managing committee's resolution of the society." 19. In respect of the above, learned Single Judge on due consideration held as under : "22. As per the tender conditions noted above, tenderer was to accompany the requisite certificates indicated in the NIT which included Fishing Experience Certificate, SC Certificate and Certificate of Actual Fishermen; the list of names and address and age of the members of the Society, etc. As per the tender conditions noted above, tenderer was to accompany the requisite certificates indicated in the NIT which included Fishing Experience Certificate, SC Certificate and Certificate of Actual Fishermen; the list of names and address and age of the members of the Society, etc. Upon verification of the records what I have found is that the tenders submitted by the petitioner did not accompany the duly approved resolution of its society authorizing its Secretary Shri Dulal Chandra Sarkar to submit tender. On the other hand, the tender submitted by M/s. Gauripur Society Ltd. did contain the duly approved resolution of the society authorizing its Secretary Shri Debendra Nath Sarkar to submit the tender. The resolution was approved by the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Dhubri. Such approval is essential, inasmuch as, in absence of any such approval, any person purportedly representing a society could submit tender, although not duly authorized by the Co-operative society. Even otherwise also in the activities of a Co-operative Society, its resolutions are required to be approved by the authority acting under the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam. 23. Apart from the above deficiencies, the tender submitted by the petitioner was also not accompanied by Fishing Experience Certificate; 100% SC Actual Fishermen and their livelihood is fishing and the approved member list of the Society. On scrutiny of the tender submitted by the petitioner, it is found that the fishing experience Certificate was issued by the Sub-Divisonal Fishery Development Officer, Bilasipara on 4.1.2010 but not by an authority under the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam. That apart, the requirement of being 100% SC actual Fishermen and their livelihood is fishing was also not enclosed along with the tender documents. As to what is the position relating to the list of members of the society has been noted above. Admittedly, the tender submitted by the petitioner did not accompany the said membership list. It was only after opening of the bids and preparation of the comparative statement, the petitioner had submitted the said list which the authority declined to accept. Par contra, the respondent No. 7, i.e., M/s. Gauripur Society submitted its tender accompanied by 100% actual fishermen belong to SC community Certificate of the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Dhubri and all other documents along with the list of members and the approved resolution of the society in respect of submission of tender". 20. Par contra, the respondent No. 7, i.e., M/s. Gauripur Society submitted its tender accompanied by 100% actual fishermen belong to SC community Certificate of the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Dhubri and all other documents along with the list of members and the approved resolution of the society in respect of submission of tender". 20. Holding that appellant society did not submit the essential Certificates and, therefore, there was nothing wrong in the decision of the settling authority in not considering the tender of the appellant society on merit, learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. 21. We are in agreement with the views expressed by the learned Single Judge. As already noticed above, considering the requirement of rule 12 of the Assam Fishery Rules, 1953 (as amended), and the nature of settlement, in our view, atleast three of the four documents not submitted by the appellant society along with the tender fall within the category of essential qualification criteria. Membership list, 100% Scheduled Caste actual fishermen Certificate and fishing experience Certificate undoubtedly fall within essential qualification criteria. Non-submission of such documents, therefore, rendered the tender of the appellant society invalid. Reliance placed on Abu Talib (supra) is misplaced inasmuch as in that case Bakijai clearance Certificate was not submitted, which was rightly held by this court to be not an essential qualification criteria. 22. For the aforesaid reasons, we find no merit in the writ appeal, which is accordingly dismissed. 23. However, there shall be no order as to cost.