Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
N. Anand Venkatesh, J.
M.Ramakrishnan – Petitioner
Versus
The District Collector Pudukottai and ors. – Respondents
W.P.(MD)No.4972 of 2021 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.4031, 4034 and 6103 of 2021
Decided On : 28-06-2021
Auction - Grant license for collecting fees - Consequential direction - Petitioner, he had taken requisite demand draft and submitted bid before the third respondent at about 4.30 p.m. - Grievance of petitioner is that third respondent for reasons best known refused to receive tender documents and demand draft and therefore, the petitioner gave a representation on spot to third respondent - Third respondent gave a written rejection letter to effect that there was a delay in submitting documents and therefore, tender submitted by petitioner cannot be accepted - Subsequently tender was allotted in favour of impleaded 5th respondent - Tenderer cum Auctioner shall pay EMD to tune by way of demand draft and bring solvency certificate for a sum and same shall be deposited with Town Panchayat before 05.00 p.m. so as to get themselves registered for participating in tender process and to get necessary entry permit to participate in the tender cum auction- Those who do not have solvency certificate were given the option of depositing DD - After public auction, sealed tenders will be opened on same day in presence of tenderers - Tender will be fixed in favour of highest bidder considering public auction and sealed tenders – Held, it is taken that third respondent had issued license much before interim orders were passed, work order should not have been issued with effect, since interim injunction granted by this Court was in force - Third respondent ought to have approached this Court and either sought for a clarification or sought for vacating of interim order - Third respondent did not deem it fit to resort to either of these procedures and directly proceeded to issue the work order in favour of the 5th respondent - Act of third respondent is clearly in violation of the interim order passed by this Court - License granted by third respondent in favour of 5th respondent by issuing the work order with effect from must be considered to be non-est and void in teeth of interim order passed by this Court - If orders passed by a competent Court is disregarded and officials proceed to act on their own, it is duty of Court to restore rule of law and nullify such illegal acts of officials - Writ petition is allowed.
ORDER :
This writ petition has been filed to declare the tender cum auction conducted by the third respondent as null and void and for a consequential direction to the respondents to conduct a fresh auction to grant license for collecting fees in the daily shandy and weekly shandy.
2. The third respondent issued a tender notice to issue license for collecting fees in the daily shandy and weekly shandy, through proceedings dated 03.02.2021. It is seen from this notification that the participant must take a demand draft for a sum of Rs.10 lakhs and submit the tender documents on or before 23.02.2021 before 5.00 p.m. The auction was slated to be held on 24.02.2021.
3. According to the petitioner, he had taken the requisite demand draft and submitted the bid before the third respondent at about 4.30 p.m. on 23.02.2021. The grievance of the petitioner is that the third respondent for reasons best known refused to receive the tender documents and the demand draft and therefore, the petitioner gave a representation on the spot to the third respondent. The third respondent gave a written rejection letter to the effect that there was a delay in submitting the documents and therefore, the tender submitted by the petitioner cannot be accepted. Subsequently the tender was allotted in favour of the impleaded 5th respondent.
4. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.
5. The third respondent has filed a counter affidavit and the relevant portions in the counter affidavit are extracted hereunder:
8. I state that the condition No.40 stipulates that those who are yet to clear the arrears of property tax, professional tax, license fee, water charges, shop rents and other arrears due to the town panchayat, shall remit the same before the auction. Only after such remittance such persons will be allowed to participate in the auction. The aforesaid notification dated 03.02.2021 was published in the Dinabhoomi dated on 09.02.2021.
9. One Balasubramanian, S/o.Perumal was the licensee for a block period of 3 years ie., 2018-2019, 2019-2020 and 2020-2021. The license was issued to him as per G.O.Ms.No. 181 MA&WS Department dated 19.09.2008. He has to pay the following amount as license fee.
| 2018-2019 | Rs.30,20,000/- |
| 2019-2020 | Rs.31,71,000/- (over and above 5%) |
| 2020-2021 | Rs.33,29,550/- (Over and above 5%) |
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
