KUDUMULA RAMREDDY Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed to declare the proceedings No. A1/152/KLKY/2022, dtd. 1/4/2021 (dtd. 1/4/2022) issued by the 2nd respondent as illegal and arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. The petitioner seeks a consequential direction to the 2nd respondent to enter into the agreement of lease with the petitioner in respect of cattle market Kalwakurthy Town as per the notification No. A1/535/2022, dtd. 17/3/2022 by cancelling the allotment of the said contract to the 3rd respondent.

(2.) Sri N. Bhujanga Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent has issued a tender notification on 17/3/2022 inviting bids from the public for cattle market, Tai bazar and slaughter house for the year 2022- 23 ie. from 1/4/2022 to 31/3/2023 and the said notification was published in Telugu newspaper on 18/3/2022. It is stated that as per the said notification, the bidders have to submit their bids on or before 23/2/2022 by 05.00 P.M. and they will be opened on 24/3/2022 at 11.00 a.m. It is also stated that the petitioner participated in the auction in respect of cattle market and Tai bazar and he paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000.00 and Rs.2,00,000.00 to the 2nd respondent by way of two DDs. bearing Nos. 661451 and 661452 towards deposit. Learned counsel submits that the 2nd respondent acknowledged receipt of the said amount by way of DDs. and issued receipts in favour of the petitioner. He submits that tenders were opened on 24/3/2022 and the petitioner was declared as the highest bidder for a sum of Rs.1,11,22,000.00 for cattle market and the

(3.) rd respondent stood as the second highest bidder for Rs.1,11,21,000.00 and the same was even published in newspapers. He further submits that the petitioner was waiting for allotment letter from the 2nd respondent and has been pursuing the same with the 2nd respondent's office. It is stated that on 1/4/2022, the petitioner received proceedings by WhatsApp that the lease of the cattle market of Kalwakurthy Municipality was allotted to the 3rd respondent who is the second highest bidder as the petitioner did not turn up for payment of one-fourth bid amount towards agreement. It is further stated that the 3rd respondent on 1/4/2022 paid onefourth of total bid amount of Rs.27,80,250.00. Learned counsel submits that though the petitioner is the highest bidder, without issuing any notice and without any proceedings, saying that the petitioner has failed to pay the amount, they have awarded the contract in favour of the unofficial respondent. He submits that the petitioner is not aware of payment of onefourth amount as the particular date was not mentioned in the auction notification, till he received the communication from the respondent Municipality. It is stated that the action of the 2nd respondent is in clear violation of the principles of natural justice as either under the tender conditions or under the provisions of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019, there is no condition of depositing one-fourth amount. Learned counsel submits that when once the petitioner has been declared as the highest tenderer, without any further notice, the 2nd respondent has no authority to allot contract in favour of the unofficial respondent. 3. Learned Standing Counsel Sri N. Praveen Kumar appearing for the 2nd respondent Municipality filed a counteraffidavit. He submits that as the tender period is going to start from 1/4/202, the highest bidder has to pay one-fourth of the bid amount to the municipality by 1/4/2022. It is stated that the petitioner failed to pay the amount even after the reminder through message dtd. 1/4/2022. It is also stated that the petitioner participated in Thai Bazar auction on 24/3/2022 and paid one-fourth amount on 31/3/2022. It is stated that as the petitioner expressed his inability in spite of the reminder from the municipality, they have collected the amount from the 3rd respondent and allotted the contract in his favour. Learned Standing Counsel submits that the petitioner has approached this Court with unclean hands. He further submits that having paid one-fourth amount in respect of Thai Bazar, the petitioner has failed to pay the amount in respect of cattle market, that itself shows that the petitioner is not ready to pay the amount. Learned Standing Counsel submits that as per the tender, when the period starts from 1/4/2022, the auction amount has to be paid before that time. It is stated that the 2nd respondent has requested the petitioner to pay the said amount at 11.00 a.m. and the petitioner failed to respond. As the Sunday cattle market is falling on 3/4/2022 and there was a public holiday on 2/4/2022 on the occasion of Ugadi festival, it is stated that the 2nd respondent was left with no other option but to request the petitioner to enter into agreement by way of phone message and calls. According to the learned Standing Counsel, as the petitioner failed to respond and the tender period starting date already approached, the 2nd respondent was left with only choice to call the second highest bidder.