Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SANDEEP KUMAR
Shailendra Prasad Singh Son of Late Rajmohan Singh – – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar through The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Govt. of Bihar, Patna – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP KUMAR, J.
1. The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-
“a) For quashing the order bearing Memo No.1396 dated 08.10.2025 issued under the signature of Respondent No.3 whereby the Earnest Money Deposited by the Petitioner in the auction for settlement of Sandghat Aurangabad Son - 14A has been arbitrarily forfeited;
b) For direction upon the Respondent No.3 to refund the amount of Rs. 2,34,22,500/- which was deposited by the Petitioner as EMD in connection with Tender Notice for settlement of Sandghat Aurangabad Block 14-A (Aurangabad Son 14-A) or in alternative consider the said EMD submitted vide NEFT bearing UTR No. SBINR52025090597754809 as EMD for the fresh Tender Notice floated on 20.10.2025, including Aurangabad Son 14-A Sandghat at Serial 2;
c) For issuance of writ or order or a direction restraining the respondent from the proceeding with the fresh tender process pursuant to NIT dated 20.10.2025 in exclusion of the petitioner till adjudication and disposal of this writ petition.
d) For directing the Respondent No.3 to settle the Sandghat Aurangabad Son 14-A re-advertised vide short notice inviting Tender Notice dated 20.10.2025 in favou
The forfeiture of earnest money for failure to increase the bid price by a sole bidder was invalid due to a vague show cause notice and denial of personal hearing, violating principles of natural jus....
The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to principles of natural justice, ruling that no one should be condemned unheard, and set aside the forfeiture of the Earnest Money Deposit.
Presence of an arbitration clause would oust jurisdiction under Article 226.
The timing of offer acceptance and withdrawal in relation to EMD forfeiture is crucial in determining the applicability of tender clauses and the entitlement to EMD return.
A bidder cannot claim EMD refund due to an inadvertent error in a bid amount when sufficient safeguards exist in the bidding process to prevent such mistakes.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
