MUKUNDA SINGH Vs. HAREKRUSHNA JENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGING , inter alia, the action of the Tahasildar, Jaleswar directing the opposite party No. 1 to pay 75% of the bid amount after expiry of thirty days from the date of auction of sairat and allowing him to operate Kantapal sand sairat under Jaleswar Tahasil without environmental clearance, the petitioner has filed this present writ petition.

(2.) THE short facts of the case of the petitioner is that the Tahasildar, Jaleswar, opposite party No. 2 issued a public notice on 22.2.2014 for auction of various sand sairats fixing the date of auction to 26.3.2014 and 29.3.2014, vide Annexure -1. Due to unavoidable circumstances, the auction was kept in abeyance and, accordingly, another notice was published in daily newspaper "the Samaj" on 25.3.2014. Again a notice was issued on 22.4.2014 fixing the date of auction to 30.4.2014, 1.5.2014 and 2.5.2014 respectively, vide Annexure -2. It is further stated that in Sairat Case No. 37 of 2014 -15, which pertains to Kantapal Sand Source in respect of plot No. 1662, area Ac.2.00 and plot No. 1289, area Ac.8.85 under khata No. 483 of mouza Kantapal. Opposite party No. 2 had fixed the upset price at Rs. 20,11,900/ - for the year 2014 -15. But due to notification of Election Commissioner, the matter was postponed. Finally by order dated 22.4.2014, it was decided to put the sairat in auction on 30.4.2014. While the matter stood thus, on 30.4.2014, the Sub -Collector conducted the auction. The opposite party No. 1 was the highest bidder. The sairat was finalized in his favour for Rs. 46,03,500/ -. Thereafter, opposite party No. 1 deposited an amount of Rs. 11,56,930/ - on 30.4.2014, which was 10% of the upset price and 25% of the bid amount. He was directed to deposit the rest 75% of the bid amount i.e. 34,46,500/ - within thirty days from the date of auction. But the opposite party No. 2 had extended time beyond thirty days. On 7.7.2014 and 12.8.2014, the opposite party No. 2 had extended time to opposite party No. 1 to deposit the balance amount.

(3.) THE opposite party No. 1, who is the highest bidder, has also filed a counter affidavit taking the similar stand to that of the opposite party No. 2.