NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD BALAGHAT Vs. RAJESH BHOJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the writ petitions involve a common question of fact and law; therefore, they are heard together and are disposed of by this singular order.

(2.) The reliefs prayed for and challenge in the present petitions is to the order dated 11.8.2009, AnnexureP-1, passedby the Collector, District Balaghat whereby exercising the power under Section 323 of the Municipalities Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") he has cancelled the tender proceedings dated 16.6.2009. Be it noted, the said tender proceedings were conducted by the petitioner, Nagar Palika Parishad, Balaghat (for brevity "the Council") pursuant to auction' notice dated 21.5.2009, AnnexureP-2, for collection of daily and weekly market tax, for Sarekha Bazar, lather market and also for footpath tax. In the proceedings dated 16.6.2009 the tender floated by Raja Chourasia, the petitioner in the connected writ petition, was accepted and later on approved by the Municipal Council in its meeting dated 27.6.2009, AnnexureP-6 and work order was also issued in favour of petitioner, Raja Chourasia.

(3.) Before the Collector one Rajesh Bhoj, respondent herein, filed an appeal under Section 323 of the Act challenging the acceptance, of tender in favour of petitioner Raja Chourasia on the ground that the persons who had participated in the tender proceedings owed huge balance to the Council but despite that no objection certificates were issued in their favour whereas the appellant who had applied for no objection certificate on 11.6.2009 as he had no dues of the Council but arbitrarily the proceedings were taken up on 16.6.2009 and he was not allowed to participate in the tender proceedings and therefore, the tender proceedings were vitiated. An objection was filed on behalf of the Council contending, inter- alia, that appellant Raja Bhoj was living with his father and brother in joint family and as per the record of the Council they had huge balance outstanding against them, therefore, no objection certificate was not issued to him. The authority considered the rival submissions advanced by the parties and on scrutiny of the record held the proceedings dated 16.6.2009 as vitiated and directed for cancellation of the proceedings dated 16.6.2009 and further directed the petitioner Council for re-auction of the same.