JUDGMENT & ORDER : Heard Mr. KN Choudhury, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S Chamaria, learned Standing counsel, Assam Seeds Corporation. 2. The respondent, Assam Seeds Corporation had issued an e-procurement notice dated 01.09.2016 inviting bids from the eligible bidders for supply of plant materials (plant, grafts & hybrid seeds of vegetables) (Group-C) as mentioned in the bidding document. The petitioner being an interested bidder, pursuant to the aforesaid e-procurement notice dated 01.09.2016 had participated in the said process. It is stated that the petitioner is particularly interested for supply of plant, grafts & hybrid seeds of Marigold, Tuberose etc., Mujaffarpur Litchi, Khasi Mandarin, Guava, Mango and Hybrid Coconut (Kerala Dwarf variety). 3. The petitioner is aggrieved in this writ petition to the effect that the respondent authorities are resorting to some other method to arrive at L1 bidder in a manner which is contrary and de hors the provisions of the terms and conditions of the e-procurement notice dated 01.09.2016. 4. It is stated that as per Clause 19(c)(B)(iii), the purchaser will disqualify and reject a bid if the bidder has quoted higher/lower price for a class/type of seed offered by the bidder. It is further provided in the said Clause 19(c)(B)(iii) that the base price for determining higher/lower price shall be the average purchase price of the respondent Corporation for the concerned item for the last 3(three) years i.e. for the years 2015-2016, 2014-2015, 2013-2014 and any bid offering a bid price which is 15% above or below the base price will be rejected. 5. Accordingly, as per the provisions of the aforesaid clause 19(c)(B)(iii) of the Indication for Bids (IFB), it is apparent that the respondent authorities are required to first arrive at a base price of the previous 3(three) years i.e. of the years 2015-2016, 2014-2015, 2013-2014. 6. In the absence of the appropriate data for the purchase price of the aforesaid 3(three) years, the requirement of clause 19(c)(B)(iii) cannot be implemented and no base price can be arrived at. 7. It is stated by Mr. S Chamaria, learned Standing counsel, Assam Seeds Corporation by referring to paragraphs 6 and 7 of the affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent Corporation that the respondent authorities does not have the data for the aforesaid in respect of the purchase price with the items indicated above. 8. In this respect, Mr. 7. It is stated by Mr. S Chamaria, learned Standing counsel, Assam Seeds Corporation by referring to paragraphs 6 and 7 of the affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent Corporation that the respondent authorities does not have the data for the aforesaid in respect of the purchase price with the items indicated above. 8. In this respect, Mr. KN Choudhury by referring to the affidavit-in-reply of the petitioner states that, in fact, the said datas are available. 9. Be that as it may, if the respondent authorities are of the view that the concerned data is not available, the appropriate base price cannot be arrived at and if the appropriate base price cannot be arrived, the respondent authorities cannot determine as to which of the bids are 15% below or above the base price. Accordingly, the provisions for disqualification under clause 19(c)(B)(iii) becomes redundant and cannot be implemented. 10. However, the second part of the said clause 19(c)(B)(iii) indicates that in the event the data for the average purchase price relating to particular item for the last three years by the Corporation is not available, the same shall be determined by the respondent authorities on the basis of the accepted tender prices of the similar items by the Directorate of Horticulture or by the Directorate of Agriculture/Market Survey, including information from other State Public Sector Agencies. 11. In such view of the matter, if the stand of the respondent authorities is accepted that they do not have the required base price of the previous three years, it is for the respondent authorities to fulfill the procedure prescribed in the second paragraph of clause 19(c)(B)(iii) and arrive at a base price either by accepting the tendered price of the Directorate of Horticulture, or the Directorate of Agriculture or by making market survey, including information from other State Public Sector Agencies in respect of the concerned items. 12. In view of such provisions of the second paragraph of clause 19(c)(B)(iii), this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent authorities to arrive at an appropriate base price by following the procedure indicated in the second paragraph of the clause 19(c)(B)(iii). 13. Upon the base price being determined, it shall be duly notified so that all the intending tenderers have the knowledge as to what is the base price that the authorities had arrived at. 13. Upon the base price being determined, it shall be duly notified so that all the intending tenderers have the knowledge as to what is the base price that the authorities had arrived at. On being notified, the respondent authorities shall proceed with the e-procurement notice and bring the same to its logical end. 14. It is made clear that without determining and declaring the base price in respect of the concerned items i.e., Marigold, Tuberose etc., Mujaffarpur Litchi, Khasi Mandarin, Guava, Mango and Hybrid Coconut (Kerala Dwarf variety), the respondent authorities shall not further proceed with the e-procurement dated 01.09.2016 and shall proceed only after notifying the base price as indicated above. 15. The respondent authorities would be at liberty to proceed with the said e-procurement notice by accepting the tenders on the basis of the declared base price or be at liberty to invite any fresh e-procurement notice by indicating the base price. 16. In terms of the above, this writ petition stands disposed of.