Point of Law : vice that attaches to an order passed in contravention of the Rules of natural justice cannot be cured ex post facto by affording to the person affected thereby an opportunity to represent his case after the order is passed.

ORDER :

1. Both these petitions are arising out of common grievance raised in the petitions, but since challenge to the impugned orders are almost similar and in view of the fact that both were clubbed together, the same are taken up upon request for its decision in common and as such, Special Civil Application No. 17727 of 2018 is treated as a lead matter and for the sake of convenience, the facts are taken from the said petition.

2. By way of this lead petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :-

“8(a) This Honourable Court may be pleased to issue any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned orders passed by the Collector, Mahisagar – respondent no. 2 herein dated 18.07.2017 in the proceeding bearing number NPL/VASHI/333/17 as well as the order dated 14.11.2018 passed by the respondent no. 1 – Commissioner of Municipalities in the Appeal No. 46/ File No. 935/Vashi/2018, which are at Annexure-A to the present petition;

(b) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Honourable Court may be pleased to stay further operation, implementation and execution of the impugned orders passed by the Collector – Mahisagar – respondent no. 2 herein dated 18.07.2017 in the proceeding bearing number NPL/VASHI/333/17 as well as the order dated 14.11.2018 passed by the respondent no. 1 – Commissioner of Municipalities in the Appeal No. 46/File No. 935/Vashi/2018, which are at Annexure-A tot he present petition;

(c) Grant such other and further relief/s as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

3. The case in brief of the petitioner is that there is a land situated being City Survey No. 3387 within the limits of Nagar Palika and which is referred to as Revenue Survey No 1036/1/1 paiki in the revenue records, belongs to the petitioner – Nagar Palika. The total area of land is admeasuring about 4460 sq.mtrs., and in the year 1999, the said land was purchased by the petitioner – Nagar Palika from the State Government.

3.1. It is the case of the petitioner that in respect of this land, the General Body of the petitioner – Nagar Palika passed various Resolutions ranging from the year 2012 till 2014, unanimously resolving to allot the land admeasuring 200-250 sq.mtrs., from the said City Survey No. 3387 for the construction of 10 offices/showrooms/go-downs for the purpose of leasing out. The General Body of the petitioner – Nagar Palika passed Resolution No. 317 on 27.01.2012; Resolution No. 422 on 07.01.2013; Resolution No. 24 on 19.03.2013; Resolution No. 160 on 13.06.2014; Resolution No. 136 on 20.01.2014, whereas Resolution No. 10 was passed on 27.04.2014.

3.2. It is further the case of the petitioner that before proceeding with the auction, the Nagar Palika has got Jantri valuation of the land in question and after considering the valuation, an advertisement came to be published in local daily news paper on 05.02.2014, inter alia inviting applications from public at large for offering bids for construction of offices/show rooms/godowns at their own costs, which would be allotted to the successful bidders for a period of nine years only, meaning thereby, on the allotted portion, construction will have to be undertaken by the successful bidders who are to be allotted. The petitioner has received as many as 42 applications, out of which, on proper scrutiny it was found that 10 applications were found to be eligible/suitable for allotment of 10 plots. Accordingly, after opening of price bids on 18.06.2014, the petitioner proceeded ahead with the allotment process. The Chief Officer, at the relevant point of time was of the opinion that some more price can be fetched. As a result of this, after passing necessary order, the price was also enhanced vide letter dated 18.06.2014, which was also duly communicated to the respective applicants and again after undertaking the process of scrutiny on the revised bi