VIRANDRA NARAIN SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) OM Prakash, J. Brief facts of the case are that all the petitioners parti cipated in the auction held on 27th September, 1993 and then each petitioner made the highest bid and filed highest tender for grant of lease of one year com mencing from September, 1993 to October. 1994. Since a stay order was passed by the High Court in Writ Petition No. 30005 of 1993, the lease deed could not be executed by the respondents and at the time of the lease was running fast, the petitioners applied by application dated 27-12-1993 to refund their security and the amount of first instalment which they deposited on the date of auction when the highest bid was made.

(2.) IT is admitted in paragraph 6 of the counter-affidavit that the bid of the petitioners could not be accepted on account of the stay order passed in the aforesaid writ petition which stayed the finalisation of the leases in favour of the petitioners. In paragraph 10 of the counter-affidavit it is stated that the writ petitions No. 30005 of 1993 and 30006 of 1993 were decided on 14-2-1994 and then the bid/tender of the petitioners had been accepted.

(3.) SIMILAR question came up for consideration in Writ Petition No. 9696 of 1994 Shiv Trading Company and another v. The District Magistrate District Officer Banda and another, in which we accepted the contention of the peti tioner that they can withdraw their offer before that was finally accepted by the respondents.