NITIN GOYAL Vs. UNION TERRITORY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C.M. No. 145 -18 of 2013

(2.) THE present writ petition is directed against the impugned action of the respondent -authorities, while putting the registration No. CH -01 -AU -0006 to re -auction, despite having accepted the highest bid of the petitioner, in the auction held on 02.08.2013. Facts of the case are hardly in dispute. Petitioner purchased a vehicle vide Annexure P -1. A public notice appended at Annexure P -2, was issued inviting applications for allotment of special numbers. In response to the public notice (Annexure P -2), petitioner applied for five numbers. He deposited requisite amount of reserve price i.e. Rs. 15,000/ - each for three numbers and Rs. 10,000/ - each for two numbers, particulars whereof stated in para 4 of the writ petition. Auction for allotment of special registration numbers was held on 02.08.2013 at 10.00 a.m. in the office of respondent No. 3. Since the petitioner had applied for five numbers, he received 5 letters out of which one has been appended at Annexure P -3. Petitioner appeared and participated in the auction on 02.08.2013. The special number in question is CH -01 -AU 0006.

(3.) AS directed, petitioner received the amount on account of refund of his remaining applications. However, when he approached the office of respondent No. 3 on 03.08.2013 i.e. very next day, he was informed that auction of No. CH -01 -AU 0006 has been cancelled on the ground that special numbers fetched lower price than what was expected. Petitioner submitted two representations. Annexure P -4 was submitted to respondent No. 2 and Annexure P -5, a similar representation was submitted to respondent No. 3. Without deciding the above said representations of the petitioner, impugned public notice (Annexure P -6) was issued, for re -auction of many special numbers including the above said number i.e. CM -01 -AU 0006, which was purchased by the petitioner as highest bidder.