SUDARSANAN Vs. DFO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As per Ext. Pi notification the first respondent invited offers for the right to collect the tops and barks from the forest. The petitioner was one of the participants in the auction and he was the highest bidder. Auction was confirmed later. But the petitioner did not execute the necessary agreement. Therefore, after issuing notice the first respondent as per Ext. P2 directed the petitioner to remit the loss sustained to the Government on account of the petitioner's conduct in not executing the agreement. In the absence of payment by the petitioner the amount was ordered to be recovered by means of Revenue Recovery Act. After considering the objection filed by the petitioner to Ext. P2 the proposal was confirmed is Ext. P4. It is Exts. P2 and P4 that are under challenge in this Original Petition.

(2.) Sri. M. Ramachandran, learned counsel for the petitioner argued two points against the legality of Exts. P2 and P4; (1) There was no concluded contract between the parties and therefore, no loss alleged to have been sustained to the Government can be recovered from the petitioner; and (2) the above amount is not recoverable by means of the Revenue Recovery Act.

(3.) Clause.5 of Ext. P1 notification says that if the person who bid in auction commits default in payment of balance amount after executing the agreement, he is liable to pay the amount of loss sustained to the Government. It was also stated that the above amount can be recovered through the revenue recovery proceedings.