K DAKSHINAMURTHY Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR VILLUPURAM DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE parties, the relief sought for and the cause of action in both the writ petitions are one and the same and on consent both the writ petitions are taken up together for disposal.

(2.) THE petitioner challenges the proceedings of the respondent in Ref. A/g and M/402/94 dated 30. 01. 2005 by which the respondent rejected the request of the petitioner to execute the lease deed in his favour for a period of five years in respect of stone quarry situated in survey No. 97/19 part VII over an extent of 6. 19. 0 hectares in Tiruvakkarai village, Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District and further the 50% of the bid amount paid by him was forfeited to Government on the ground that the petitioner violated the auction sale conditions by not remitting the balance bid amount in time. The petitioner also sought for mandamus by way of direction to the respondent to execute the lease in favour of the petitioner by quashing the above proceedings. The precise facts on which the writ petitions have been filed proceed as follows : The respondent issued a gazette notification in the district gazette No. 3 dated 27. 12. 1993 notifying several stone quarries situated at Villupuram district and calling for tenders for the same. The petitioner's bid in a sum of Rs. 80,300/- was accepted as the highest bid and the petitioner has been declared as the highest bidder in respect of the above quarry on 20. 01. 1994. The petitioner paid a sum of Rs. 1,000/- as Earnest Money Deposit and a sum of Rs. 40,150/- being 50% of the lease amount on 21. 01. 1994 and he paid another sum of Rs. 15,000/- on 02. 02. 1994.

(3.) THE petitioner being the highest bidder as per the notification has to pay local cess and local cess surcharge on the bid amount. As the levy of local cess and local cess surcharge by the State Government was held to be incompetent by the Supreme Court, the petitioner filed writ petition No. 1520 of 1994 seeking the levy of local cess and local cess surcharge on the lease amount to be illegal, in which writ petition, interim order of demand of local cess and local cess surcharge was granted in favour of the petitioner. When the petitioner offered to pay the balance lease amount, he was informed that one Sevanammal and other ceylon repatriates have filed the writ petitions Nos. 687 to 689 of 1994 on 07. 01. 1994 claiming preferential treatment under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. As their application for the preferential treatment was pending before the authorities concerned in respect of the subject quarry, they sought for quashing the tender proceedings. Pending those writ petitions they also obtained an order of stay of confirmation of the lease in favour of the petitioner. Thus, because of the pendency of those writ petitions further proceedings remained in a stalement. While that being so, it was brought to the notice of the petitioner on 18. 01. 1994 some other third parties (M. Subramanian and others) have filed writ petitions Nos. 823 to 825 of 1994 challenging the very notification under which tender has been granted in favour of the petitioner and in those writ petitions also interim order of stay of all further proceedings of the notification was granted.