ARPITHA Vs. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the communication dated 31.08.2018 issued by the respondent No.2 whereby the auction of site to which the petitioner was the highest bidder has been cancelled and 25% of the amount paid by the petitioner has been refunded in order to re-conduct the e-auction afresh.

(2.) The petitioner is claiming to be the highest bidder of site No.39 of further extension of Sir M. Visveshwaraiah Layout. It is submitted that pursuant to the notification dated 26.03.2018, the petitioner has participated in the e-auction of the corner site by depositing Rs.4 Lakhs as EMD deposit for each site in respect of four sites. The amount of deposit in respect of three sites was refunded accepting the bid offered in respect of site No.39 of Sir M. Visveswaraiah Layout and the petitioner was directed to deposit 25% of the value of the site. Accordingly, the petitioner has deposited the same within the time stipulated. It is the grievance of the petitioner instead of confirmation of the sale, the respondents have cancelled the auction and attempted to re-auction the said site.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the writ petition would submit that the petitioner having participated in the e-auction proceedings held on 28.06.2018, being the highest bidder is entitled to confirmation of the sale. The respondents have issued cancellation order without assigning valid reasons despite the petitioner complying with the conditions of auction sale as stipulated under the Bangalore Development Authority [Disposal of Corner Sites, Intermediate Sites, Commercial Sites and other Auctionable Sites] Rules, 1984.