HEMLATA GUPTA Vs. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to Respondent No. 2-Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (Rs.DSIIDC'), to issue an allotment letter and handover the vacant possession of industrial plot bearing no. 1356, Sector-H, ad-measuring 368.32 sqm., DSIIDC, Narela, Delhi (Rs.subject plot') to the Petitioner being the successful bidder in the e-auction held on 3/11/2023. The Petitioner further seeks quashing of the Notice Inviting Tender (Rs.NIT') dtd. 24/12/2023 issued by Respondent No. 2 for re-auctioning the subject plot.

(2.) Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the reserve price for the plot was fixed at 3,40,32,768/-. He states that during the e-auction held on 3/11/2023, the Petitioner herein submitted her last bid for 3,45,82,768/- which is 5,50,000/- more than the reserve price. He states that despite the Petitioner being the highest bidder, the Respondent No. 2 failed to issue an allotment letter in her favour and instead wrongfully returned the earnest money deposited by the Petitioner. He states that no explanation was offered to the Petitioner for the aforesaid cancellation of the tender process. He states that the Petitioner has now learnt that the subject plot has been re-tendered for e-auction with the same reserve price of 3,40,32,768/-.

(3.) In reply, learned standing counsel for Respondent No.2-DSIIDC, states that in order to have fair competition in bidding and with a view to maximise their revenue, the Respondent No.2 had specifically clarified and directed the National Informatics Centre's (Rs.NIC') e-Auction portal to allow bidding in the e-auction only for those plots for which there were at least two (2) bidders. He states that this condition was specifically mentioned by Respondent No.2 in the auction details uploaded on the e-Auction portal. In this regard, he relies upon the instructions uploaded on 2/11/2023 And filed along with counter affidavit as Annexure R2. He states that however, contrary to the said instruction of having minimum two bidders, the e-auction went live on 3/11/2023, leading to an undesirable situation where the Petitioner herein was the sole bidder.