LAWS(MAD)-2012-4-157

R. ASAITHAMBI Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUCHIRAPALLI

Decided On April 23, 2012
R. Asaithambi Appellant
V/S
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUCHIRAPALLI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of the dismissal of W.P.(MD) No.3958 of 2012 declining to quash re-auction notification bearing Na.Ka.No.66/2012 A1, dated 02.03.2012 to re-auction for collection of licence fee from "Weekly Sandy" and "Goat Sandy" of S.Kannanur.

(2.) BRIEF facts are that 2nd Respondent - The Executive Officer, S.Kannanaur Panchayat Union, Samayapuram issued notification in Na.Ka.No.66/2012/A1 dated 06.02.2012 calling for auction/tender on 29.02.2012 and 06.03.2012 to lease out various items mentioned in the schedule thereon for the period from 01.04.2012 to 31.03.2015. On 29.02.2012, Appellant - Asaithambi participated in the open auction and offered the highest bid for collection of fee from "Weekly Sandy" and "Goat Sandy" and he offered a sum of Rs.29,03,000.00 as the bid amount. The said amount offered by the Appellant was the highest bid and the same was accepted by the 2nd Respondent. As per the terms of the tender notification, Appellant was called upon to pay one-third of the bid amount initially and Appellant paid Rs.5,00,000.00 in cash and Rs.5,00,000.00 by means of demand draft drawn infavour of the 2nd Respondent. The balance bid amount has to be paid within twenty four hours after the confirmation of the auction and the Appellant was ready to pay the balance amount.

(3.) CASE of Appellant is that as per Clause-23 of the tender conditions in the notification, any person seeking re-auction has to deposit the highest bid amount along with 25% of the bid amount and caution deposit and only after the receipt of the deposit, re-auction can be ordered. Even if any one of such deposit is not made, the application for re-auction cannot be entertained. Contending that since 4th Respondent has not deposited the caution deposit as per Clause-23 of the tender conditions in the notification, 2nd Respondent ought not to have issued the impugned notification, Appellant filed Writ Petition praying to quash the said notification for re-auction.