(1.) Leave granted. Heard both the sides.
(2.) The right to conduct arrack sale in Tamil Nadu was auctioned on 28-5-1981 for the excise year 1981-82. Shop No. 49 in Koneripatti village in Sankari Taluk, District Salem was auctioned for the excise year 1981-82. In respect of the auction of this shop:the appellant was the successful bidder, and the bid amount was Rs. 6550/- per month. As per the terms, the appellant paid the caution deposit of Rs. 1000/- and a half month's rent on the same day.
(3.) Since the bid amount was found to be inadequate there was a re-auction on 11-6-1981 but there was no bidder on that day. Therefore again on 19-6-1981 the same shop was re-auctioned and one Mr. Chellamuthu was successful bidder at Rs. 6575/- per month but he failed to comply with certain requirements. Therefore it was re-auctioned on 27-6-81 but there were no bidders and the shop was re-auctioned again on 17-8-1981 when the bid was only Rs. 3000/- by one Doraisamy. The appellant was called upon by way of a communication dated 17-4-82 to pay the notional loss. It was claimed by the department that the bid of the appellant was confirmed on 28-6-81 but the appellant refused to receive the confirmed order and consequently the shop was re-auctioned for Rs. 3000/- only and therefore the difference in amount is recoverable from the appellant. This impugned order was questioned and the learned single Judge of the High Court dismissed the writ petition. It was observed by the learned Judge that records produced before him were perused and they show that the bid by the appellant was confirmed on 28-6-81 and the appellant cannot seek any relief in the writ petition having bidden the auction under certain conditions. In the writ appeal filed against the order of the single Judge, the Division Bench agreed with the learned single Judge. It was also contended before the Division Bench that his bid was never confirmed validly and that auction in favour of Doraisamy alone was the valid auction.