MAYANK DUA Vs. HARYANA SHEHARI VIKAS PRADHIKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As per pleadings on record, petitioner had submitted a bid online for SCO Site No.93, Sector 56, Gurugram in pursuance to an auction process that had been initiated by the Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'Respondent'). The bid amount was for Rs.4,73,68,800.00.

(2.) Instant writ petition has been filed raising a prayer that such bid for the site in question be accepted, being the highest bid. Further grievance raised in the petition is that no specific order has been passed informing the petitioner as regards the fate of his bid, the same having been accepted or rejected. A challenge has also been laid to Clause No.8 and 16 of the E-Auction Policy/Brochure (Annexure P-2) circulated by the respondent-Pradhikaran vide letter dtd. 16/6/2020 on the assertion that the afore-noticed clauses are arbitrary and unconstitutional.

(3.) Counsel submits that the respondent issued a public notice with regard to E-auction of commercial properties in Gurugram zone to be held on 23/10/2020. The terms and conditions with respect to the auction process were stipulated in an E-auction policy/brochure dtd. 16/6/2020 appended as Annexure P-2. The base price of each property/site was duly indicated. Petitioner being desirous of participating in the auction process pertaining to SCO Site No.93, Sector 56, Gurugram, deposited earnest money at the rate of 5 % i.e. Rs.22,61,200.00 of the base price that had been indicated as Rs.4,52,23,800.00. Petitioner participated in the E-auction conducted on 27/10/2020 under Auction ID number 403. He was notified as the highest bidder for the site in question with a bid of Rs.4,73,68,800.00 as against the base price of Rs.4,52,23,750.00. Petitioner was required to deposit 10% of the total bid amount as per applicable terms and conditions contained in the E-auction policy/brochure and the same was done within the stipulated time frame. However, without passing any order rejecting the bid of the petitioner, an amount of Rs.47,36,880.00 was credited in the saving bank account of the petitioner by the respondent on 8/12/2020. It has been submitted that inspite of repeated representations having been filed before the respondent for acceptance of the bid, no favourable response has been evoked and it is under such circumstances that the instant writ petition has been filed.