LAWS(MPH)-1987-3-19

KISHORILAL Vs. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL SAKTI

Decided On March 19, 1987
KISHORILAL Appellant
V/S
MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, SAKTI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Art.226 of the Constitution of India challenging the decision of Municipal Council, Sakti, District Bilaspur (respondent 1), granting the contract for collection of fees on sale of cattles from cattle market in favour of respondent 4, instead of the petitioner, the highest bidder in public auction held on 30-5-86.

(2.) The material facts relating to this petition are as follows :-

(3.) According to the petitioner, being the highest bidder, he was entitled to be awarded the contract, that respondent 4 did not deposit the security amount, nor did he participate in the bid, and, therefore, he was not entitled to apply and outbid the petitioner under condition No. 26; that this condition merely permits only any one of the participants in the auction to offer a higher bid than the highest; that to ensure sincerity of such offer to increase the bid, condition No. 26 further prescribes that half of the sum of highest bid shall be deposited within 24 hours; that such participant in the auction proposing to outbid the highest bidder can claim only re-auction; that Respondent 4 being an "outsider" to the auction proceedings held on 30-5-86, his offer, under condition No. 26, could not be accepted; that, in any case, that condition only provided opportunity to claim re-auction; that in all fairness, the offer made by respondent 4 could not be accepted "secretly", and "without disclosing it to the other participants" so as to afford them an opportunity to increase their offers; that Respondent 4 had not deposited sum within time prescribed; that respondent 4 was selected for awarding contract on his offer of Rs. 1-51 lacs "behind the back of the petitioner" who learnt about the same only when communication dt. 6-6-86 (Annexure-B) was sent to previous contractor Jagdish Prasad (one of the bidders) asking him to get refund of the security amount; that the offer by Respondent 4 could not be accepted without disclosing it to the petitioner, being highest bidder, and without re-auction; that petitioner was willing to offer higher bid.