GANGA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel No.2 This writ petition has been preferred with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction, commanding the respondent authorities to execute the final agreement with the petitioner for collection of toll tax of Mahatma Gandhi Setu for a period of one year, 2001 inter alia, for the reason that he is the highest bidder.

(2.) The State Government has levied toll tax on the vehicles using the bridge connecting the township of Patna with that of Hajipur spanning the river Ganga, to aross from one side to the other. The State Government has had the option of collecting he same either departmentally or by making a settlement in favour of a private agency for the purpose. So far as the present period, namely 2001 -2002 is concerned, he State Government published an advertisement which appeared in a daily newspaper Aj" on 24 -6 -2001, a copy of which is Annexure -1 to the writ petition. The important and relevant terms and conditions of the advertisement in the present context were that Rs. 10,86,00,000.CO ten crores eighty six lakh was the floor price for the bid, known in common parlance as Reserve Jama. Clause 5 is to the effect that a sum equivalent to 10% of the highest bid amount shall have to be deposited soon after the bid is over. Clause 6 stated that a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/ -(two lakh) will have to be deposited by way of earnest money. Clause 11 stated that the Chief Engineer, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, reserved with himself the right to reject a bid absolutely. The bid took place in Patna on 24 -7 -2001, and a number of persons participated. The petitioner was the highest bidder and his bid amount was Rs. 7,14,90,000/ -, which fell far short of the Reserve Jama and, therefore, authorities decided to hold negotiations with the highest bidder the petitioner, and the bid amount was raised to Rs. 7,31,00,000/ -.

(3.) It was not acceptable to the respondent authorities and, therefore, they cancelled the auction and re -advertised it on the same terms and conditions. Accordingly, the second bid took place on 7 -9 -2001. The petitioner was once again he highest bidder, the amount being 7,48,50,000/ -. It appears from the averments nade in paragraph 16 of the writ petition that once again negotiations took place between the petitioner and the respondent authorities after which the petitioner raised his bid amount to Rs. 7,60,00,501/ -. It further appears from the averments made in paragraph 17 of the writ petition that soon after the bid was over and the negotiations were complete, the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 76,00,000/ - (seventy six lakh) with the authorities, apart from his deposit of Rs. 2,00,000/ - (two lakh) as earnest money along with the application. In other words, a sum of Rs. 78,00,000/ - of the petitioner lies in the deposit with the State Government. It appears from letter No. 1335, dated 17 -10 -2001 Annexure -A to the counter -affidavit, which is a communication from the Executive Engineer, Gulzarbagh, to the petitioner, that the State Government decided to cancel the second auction also and the petitioner is ree to withdraw his amount. It is relevant to state that this order is dated 17 -10 -2001, the writ petition was affidavited on 18 -10 -2001, and was lodged in this Court on 1 -11 -2001. The petitioner did not consider it necessary to bring this order to the notice of the Court.