LAWS(CHH)-2012-9-17

WASIM NIZAMI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Decided On September 21, 2012
WASIM NIZAMI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to release the security amount of Rs. 2,56,000/- by issuing a writ of mandamus and to direct the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 22% till the above amount is released.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioner are that the respondent No. 2 issued a notification on 18.10.2004 for auction of fishing rights over Tandula Water Tank, Balod and Khapri Tank, Gunderdehi, situated in Durg District. THE date of auction was fixed on 18.11.2004 at the office of Collector, Durg. THE petitioner participated in the said auction proceedings. By letter dated 19.1.2004 (Annexure P/2), the respondent No. 2 directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 59,800/- as first installment and Rs. 2,56,000/- towards security deposit. THE petitioner deposited the security deposit but could not deposit the first installment of Rs. 59,800/-. THE amount of security deposit of Rs. 2,56,000/- was deposited on 29.11.2004 (Annexure P/3) by way of demand draft, which was received by the respondent No. 2. THE petitioner was served with a letter dated 05.01.2005 (Annexure P/5), but he could not deposit the amount as demanded by the respondent authorities. THE petitioner submitted an application for refund of his security deposit on 21.03.2005 (Annexure P/6).

(3.) IT is not the case of the respondents that they are forfeiting the advance money which is to be forfeited under the auction terms and conditions. There is no mention of deposit of any advance money in the entire pleadings asto whether any advance money was paid or not. Admittedly, the petitioner failed to enter into agreement and deposit the first installment of the tender bid amount. However, a sum of Rs. 2,56,000/- towards security amount was deposited. A notice was sent to the petitioner on 19.11.2004 (Annexure P/2) for doing the needful at the earliest. The petitioner, after deposit of the security amount failed to deposit the first installment of the amount on the ground that he was not in a position to continue with the terms and conditions of the auction notice or carry out the fishing operations. A second notice was also issued on 09.12.2004 (Annexure P/4).