ANUPAM SUPPLIERS (M/S.) Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MANERI BHAIL CONSTRUCTION DIVISION II SECOND STAGE, CHINAYALI SOD, DISTRICT UTTAR KASHI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner made an offer to the respondent No. 1 to purchase M.S. Scrap, i.e. the old Steel, at the rate of Rs. 5,000.00 per metric ton. The respondent called upon the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 75,000.00 as earnest of his offer. The petitioner says that he made the deposit within the time prescribed. The petitioner further says that the respondent did not accept the petitioners offer no did it reject the same. When the petitioner made representation in this behalf, he was informed that the respondent had no intention of selling the M.S. Scrap and that the petitioner was called upon to take back the amount deposited. The petitioners complaint through this petition is that the authority has played foul upon the petitioner. He says that the authority having called upon to petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 75,000.00 and having made the petitioner deposit the said sum, ought to have considered the petitioners offer, instead of saying that he had no intention to sell the material at all.

(2.) The proceedings of the respondent (Annexure IX dated April nil, 1989) do, indeed, go to support the petitioners grievance to a large extent. We agree with the petitioner that if the respondent had no intention of selling the said material, there was no occasion for the respondent to call upon the petitioner to deposit Rs. 75,000.00 by way of earnest money. We must say that public authorities ought not to play with the citizens. They must act fairly and responsibly. It is true that the properly belongs to the Government and it may be that it is for the respondent to decide to sell it or not, but decide he must before calling upon citizens to make offers. We are of the opinion that the officer superior to the respondent must look into this affair and examine whether it calls for any action. But, so far as this writ petition is concerned, we cannot issue a writ, order or direction directing the respondent to accept the petitioners offer on account of the said conduct. More particularly when the respondent has categorically stated in Annexure IX-A that he had no intention lo sell the said material. It is, however, made clear that if and when the said material is sought to be sold by the respondent, the petitioners offer shall be considered first, before putting it to auction or sale. The deposit or Rs. 75,000.00 made by the petitioner shall be refunded to him within two weeks from today with interest at the rate of Rs. 12.00 per annum thereon, calculated from the date of deposit till the date of refund.

(3.) With these directions the writ petition is disposed of. Petition disposed