State instrumentalities must act fairly and provide equal treatment in tender processes unless justified, as arbitrary actions violate principles of fairness.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep V. Marne, J.

1) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for rival parties, petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal.

2) The Petitioner has invoked jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging communication dated 24 December 2021, 23 March 2022 and 27 September 2023 refusing to allot the concerned plot in its favour. Petitioner has sought Writ of Mandamus against Respondent-CIDCO for allotment of the concerned plot on account of Petitioner being the highest bidder in the tender process.

3) Brief facts leading to filing of the petition are as under :

Petitioner is a partnership firm engaged in the business of real estate in the City of Navi Mumbai. City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Limited (CIDCO) owns lands interalia in the City of Navi Mumbai and allots the same on lease.

4) CIDCO is a new town Development Authority constituted under Section 113A of the MAHARASHTRA REGIONAL AND TOWN PLANNING ACT , 1966 (MRTP Act). Under Section 118 of the MRTP Act, CIDCO has the power and authority to dispose of lease lands acquired under Section 113A and vested in it by the State Government. The State Government has framed New Bombay Disposal of Land Regulations, 1975 which govern disposal of lands by the Board of Directors of CIDCO.

5) On 9 September 2021, CIDCO published tenders for allotment of residential/commercial plots in various sectors and of Navi Mumbai nodes. Plot No.27 admeasuring 3212.92 sq.mts. situated at Sector-9, Node Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai (Plot No.27) was advertised by virtue of tender notice dated 9 September 2021. 9 bids were received by CIDCO and Petitioner emerged as the highest bidder at Rs. 1,42,578/- per sq.mts. for Plot No.27. It appears that CIDCO had also advertised Plot No.24 in the vicinity of Plot No.27 for which Petitioner was the highest bidder at price of Rs. 2,12,589/- per sq.mts. CIDCO had also advertised Plot No.26 for which highest bid was by M/s. Juhi Habitat for Rs.1,72,245/- per sq.mtrs. Additionally, few more plots in Ghansoli Node were also advertised for which highest bids were below Rs.2,12,589/- per sq.mtrs. CIDCO therefore called upon all the respective highest bidders in Ghansoli Node to match the price of Rs. 2,12,589/- quoted for Plot No. 24. Aggrieved by the letter dated 24 December 2021, Petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 132/2022 in which order dated 7 January 2022 was passed granting liberty to the Petitioner to submit a representation before the Managing Director of CIDCO who was directed to decide the same. Similar order was passed in Petition filed by highest bidders of other plot in Ghansoli Node, including Juhi Habitat. After grant of personal hearing, order dated 23 March 2022 was passed by Managing Director, CIDCO directing that offer letter dated 24 December 2021 issued in respect of Plot No. 27 was recalled and cancelled. Aggrieved by letter dated 23 March 2022, Petitioner filed Interim Application No. 2057/2022 in Writ Petition No. 132/2022. On 2 August 2022, this Court granted one more opportunity to the Petitioner to approach Managing Director, CIDCO. Petitioner again made representations to CIDCO. In the said representations, Petitioner contended that the highest bidders of other plots in Ghansoli node were permitted to retain their bids and CIDCO had decided to allot plots to them based on their bids by ignoring the