ASHWANI GOYAL Vs. CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN an open auction held on 31.01.2001 pursuant to a public notice published in the newspapers, the petitioners, namely Ashwani Goyal (since deceased, now represented by his Lrs) and his brother Arvind Goyal, gave the highest bid of Rs.22,55,000/-, in respect of a booth site, measuring 2.75 X 8.25 mtrs, or say 22.68 sq.mtrs, in Sector 6, Panchkula. They deposited 10% of the bid money at the fall of the hammer and were required to deposit 15% within 30 days from the date of issue of allotment letter. The balance 75% was payable either in lump sum without interest within 60 days from the date of issue of letter of allotment or in 10 equated instalments with 15% interest. On 16.02.2001, letter of allotment (Annexure P/3) was signed and on that very day, the petitioners submitted an application (Annexure P-2) to revoke/withdraw offer of the above-stated site. However, letter of allotment was dispatched and the same was received by the petitioners in due course. Thereafter, vide application dated 09.03.2001, petitioners reiterated their demand for refund of Rs.2,25,500/- i.e. 10% of the total costs of the booth site, deposited by them at the time of auction. The request was not conceded to by the respondents and vide memorandum dated 12.03.2001, Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority (for short 'the HUDA') informed the petitioners that request made by them was meaningless and as they were to required to deposit the amount by 17.03.2001 as per letter of allotment else, in terms of condition No.4 of the letter of allotment, which was accepted by them, an amount equivalent to 10% of the deposited amount was liable to be forfeited and allotment of site to be cancelled.

(2.) TO assail correctness of the memorandum dated 12.03.2001 (Annexure P/5) and for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to refund the amount of Rs.2,25,500/-, the instant writ petition has been brought by the petitioners under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India by alleging that on 15.02.2001, the petitiones visited the site and on its measurement found that the plot available on the site actually measured 13 sq.mtrs only, whereas petitioners had participated in the auction as dimensions of the site were mentioned as 2.75 X 8.25 mtrs. which suited their requirement of establishing a Chemist shop and, as such, they were left with no option but to withdraw the offer made by them.

(3.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.