K VIMAL RAJ Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER AND THE MANAGER (MARKETING AND SERVICES), K K NAGAR DIVISION, TAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition has been filed challenging the orders passed by the respondents wherein the auction conducted in favour of the petitioner has been cancelled.

(2.) The writ petitioner participated in the auction conducted by the respondents on 30.10.2007. The said auction was conducted in pursuance of an advertisement made by the respondents on 01.10.2007. The petitioner became the successful bidder and made the required payment in-person to the auction. Thereafter, the second respondent rejected the confirmation and returned the amount deposited by the petitioner and an order was passed on 10.01.2008 by the second respondent cancelling the auction on the ground that the bid amount is very low and that they have decided to go for re-auction.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that a perusal of the auction notice as well as the re-auction notice would indicate that the very same amount has been fixed both for auction and re-auction as upset price. The learned Counsel further submitted that in so far as the allotment of plots R32 to 37 are concerned, they have confirmed that re-auction in favour of one Sivaraj. The learned Counsel submitted that the reason assigned in the impugned order is not true and hence the same has to be set-aside. The learned Counsel also relied upon a judgment of the Apex Court Rajasthan Housing Board v. G.S. Investments, 2006 8 Supreme 762 in support of his contentions and submitted that the Court should always keep the larger public interest in mind and has to pass appropriate orders.