JUDGMENT

V. GOPALA GOWDA, C.J. : The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the Tender Notice dated 5.7.2011 under Annexure-18 and any other orders in the circumstance of the case urging various facts and legal contentions.

2.The brief facts are stated for the purpose of appreciating the rival legal contention urged on behalf of the parties.

Opposite party No.2, the Orissa State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter called in short ‘the OSRTC’) is the owner of a piece of land situated at Station Road, Balasore Town, whereupon the erstwhile office building and garage stood. In pursuance of the decision of the Corporation to lease out the said property on monthly lease basis, tenders were invited and published in the Oriya daily ‘The Samaj’ dated 21.3.2012. In the said tender proceedings, the petitioner being an young entrepreneur participated and his bid being the highest, he was called upon for negotiation by the OSRTC and the bid was settled in favour of the petitioner vide letter No.11287 dated 29.4.2002 issued by opposite party No.3 and the said property was allotted to the petitioner on the terms and conditions contained therein. After due compliance of all requirements as stipulated in the said allotment letter by the petitioner, an agreement was executed on 21.8.2002 by the petitioner in favour of the Corporation represented by opposite party No.3. It was agreed by the Corporation to renew the lease beyond the stipulated period of 36 months provided the petitioner being desirous of such renewal and he applies for the same three months before the expiry of the tenure of the lease and agrees to pay an enhanced rent at the rate of 20% of the existing rent. The Estate Officer of the OSRTC vide his letter dated 4.9.2002 directed the Asst. Transport Manager (Admn.) to hand over the possession of the said premies to the petitioner and in pursuance thereof the vacant physical possession of the said premises was handed over to the petitioner on 5.9.2002 duly signed by the Estate Officer for the said purpose. It is the further case of the petitioner that subsequent to handing over the possession of the said premises to the petitioner after estimating the cost of renovation/repair of the building, the OSRTC decided to sanction up to Rs. 3,14,150/- towards the repair expenditure which is to be first spent by the petitioner from his own source and thereafter the same will be adjusted by way of 50 percent of the monthly rent to be paid by the petitioner towards the premises which is evident from the sanction order vide order No.5610 dated 17.3.2003 issued by the Accounts Officer of the Corporation. The sanction order is also produced. It is further stated that to make the premises fully fit for lodging and restaurant purpose, relying upon the promise of the OSRTC to continue such lease, invoking the renewal clause, the petitioner carried out necessary construction work which are permanent in nature incurring a huge expenses of about Rs. 25 lakhs to make the buildings business worthy as may be evident from the certificate issued by the Civil Engineer who undertook and supervised the aforesaid construction. When the matter stood thus, and the premises was ready for carrying out the aforesaid business by the petitioner, in the first week of March, 2004, to his utmost shock the petitioner received notice No.7129 dated 19.3.2004 issued by opposite party No.3 through registered post on 26.3.2004 intimating him that the agreement dated 21.8.2002 has been cancelled by the OSRTC invoking Clause-23 stating that the Corporation has intended to sell the said property. Therefore, the petitioner was called upon to vacate the premises within fifteen days. The said cancellation order was challenged by the petitioner by filing W.P.(C) No.3959 of 2004. This Court has passed the following interim order :-

“Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Issue notice to the opposite parties through Court as