(1.) The petitioner has challenged the respondents' decision to accept the 4th respondent's bid at an e-auction in respect of a plot of land. The petitioner has questioned the bona fides of the respondents and has challenged the bidding process at auction.
(2.) The bids were submitted on-line. Guidelines were issued for participation in the e-auction. The parties were to sign up and obtain the user-ID and password on the portal. Clause B-5 of the guidelines stipulates the date and time of the auction. The auction was to close at 3.00 PM on 08.11.2017. In case a bid was received five minutes prior to the time fixed for closure of the bids, the time for closure of the auction would be extended automatically by fifteen minutes. There were to be a maximum of two such extensions and post this the auction would be closed.
(3.) It is important to note that these terms and conditions do not prohibit a bidder from submitting multiple bids. More relevant these terms and conditions do not prohibit a bidder from submitting back to back consecutive bids to wit successive bids without the intervention of a counter bid by any other bidder. A bidder was, therefore, entitled to enhance his own bid or as Dr. Sidhu puts it he was entitled to bid against himself. It is this aspect which is challenged by the petitioner.