VYAPARI SANGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The centroidal issue and the Kernel of controversy that arises for adjudication in this case compels one to put a singular and pointed question: Whether a local body can abandon its sense of socio-economic purpose in entirety, abdicate its sacrosanct duty pertaining to commercial gain and pave the path of colourable originality of a xerox machine and act like a hypocrite even in sleep to propagate it has acted in good faith in a transparent manner when it has actually dealt with its largess diminishing all public element and giving it if not for a song but for slightly more than pinch of snuff? I have begun with the aforesaid protasis as the petitioner, a registered association of business of Bakshikhana Market, Sagar invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has called in question the propriety and acceptability of the action taken by the Municipal Corporation, Sagar vide resolution dated 25-8-2004 contained in Annexure-P-8 and prayed for issue of a writ of certiorari for quashment of the same and also to lancet the agreement entered into between the Municipal Corporation, the respondent No.2 herein, and the respondent No.3, Promoter/Builder, in respect of the construction of market complex and pass such order/orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(2.) The facts which are essential to be stated are that the petitioner association has 185 members and said members are the permanent lessees of the respondent-Corporation in respect of the plots/shops in their possession situated at Bhakshikhana Market, Gujarati Bazar, Sagar, Municipal Corporation, Sagar agreed to construct 183 shops over the existing Bakshikhana market place. The entire project of construction of said complex/market place was allotted in favour of respondent No.3, the Promoter, for a sum of Rs.51,61,320/- without giving wide publicity to the said project. It is pleaded that the 'Offer Invitation Notice was published in only 20-25 copies of a newspaper, namely, "Dainik Acharan" Sagar on 26-4-2004 which was a shadow of compliance of publicity. According to the writ petitioner the notice was not published in all the copies of the newspaper in question as a result of which the petitioner-association was not aware of the said offer and all this was done in clandestine manner to show favour to the respondent No.3. It is urged that by designing such a device the respondent-corporation intentionally restricted the offers from the general public and caused heavy financial loss to the Corporation and denied the benefit to the petitioner association who could have participated in the project. It is contended that vide proposal No.4 of the meeting of the Mayor-in-Council the offer of the respondent No.3 was considered for constructing a three storied market complex and the said proposal was forwarded to the Government for final approval, though the amount obtainable could have been more than rupees one crore.

(3.) According to the writ petitioner it was kept in total dark and the intention of the respondent-corporation could only be known on 26-7-2004. It is also put forth that when a public element was involved there could have been wide publicity in respect of the offer invitation notice and the same should not have been restricted to the limited copies of the newspaper which does not have much circulation.