PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
Arun Palli and Vikram Aggarwal, JJ.
Nisha Taneja – Appellant
Versus
Hsiidc And Another – Respondent
CWP No.20393 of 2024 and CWP No.20482 of 2024
Decided on : 04-12-2024
JUDGMENT :
Vikram Aggarwal, J.
For, the issue involved is identical in both the writ petitions, they shall be disposed of by way of a common judgment. The facts are primarily being derived from CWP-20393-2024, though reference to the facts of CWP-20482-2024 shall also be made wherever necessary.
2. The petitioner prays for the issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 22.03.2023 (Annexure P-7) and order dated 24.03.2023 (Annexure P-9), vide which the bid submitted by the petitioner for an industrial plot was not accepted and the earnest money deposited by her was ordered to be refunded. The petitioner also seeks that the respondents be restrained from further auctioning/allotting Plot No.20, measuring 500 sq. mtr. situated in Sector 15, Industrial Estate, Dharuhera (for short the "the disputed plot") to anyone else.
3. The facts, in brief, are that pursuant to e-auction announced in September, 2022 for the allotment of industrial plots at Dharuhera, District Rewari, the petitioner participated in the e-auction. Registration for the same was to start from 18.10.2022 and was to continue till 16.11.2022. The tentative date of start of e-auction was stated to be w.e.f. 30.11.2022 onwards. Petitioner applied for two plots 450 sq. mtr. and 500 sq. mtr. As per the E-Brochure (Annexure P-3), an applicant was supposed to pay 5% of the reserve price as earnest money. The base price for the plots was fixed at Rs.24,450/- per sq. mtr. The petitioner registered within the stipulated period and deposited earnest money of Rs.5,50,125/- and Rs.6,11,250/-respectively along with process fee. The e-auction was conducted on 10.03.2023. Petitioner opted for non-preferential plot of 500 sq. mtr. and gave a bid of Rs.24850/- per sq. mtr. She was declared successful and emerged as the highest bidder and the disputed plot was booked for her. She received e-mail dated 10.03.2023 (Annexure P-6) from the respondent-Corporation, confirming the booking of the disputed plot in her name and she was informed that payment schedule shall be informed to her after conclusion of e-auction. Thereafter, she received e-mail dated 22.03.2023 (Annexure P-7), vide which she was informed that her H1 bid for the disputed plot had not been accepted and that her earnest money would be refunded. The last date for the H1 payment being 29.03.2023, the petitioner tried to make the said payment but the payment option was deactivated.
Petitioner received another email dated 24.03.2023 (Annexure P-9), stating that H1 bid for the disputed plot category had not been accepted by the competent authority and the earnest money deposited by the petitioner was being refunded. Petitioner visited the office of the respondent-Corporation and sent representations dated 29.03.2023 (Annexure P-10) and 24.05.2023 (Annexure P-11) intimating that she was ready to pay Rs.27050/- per sq. mtr. for the disputed plot i.e. the highest bid accepted by the respondent-Corporation against the disputed plot it being a non-preferential plot. In case of non-allotment of the disputed plot, earnest money along with interest @ 12% per annum was demanded by the petitioner.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that despite her having given the highest bid which was in any case more than the reserved price, her bid for the disputed plot was not accepted by the respondent-Corporation. Total 17 categories of plots were shown in the e-brochure, however, plots in Category 1, 2 and 3 were put to auction. The petitioner applied for Category 1 plot, i.e. 500 sq. mtr. The reserve price for plots in all categories was fixed @ Rs.24450/- per sq. mtr. The plots in each category were further divided into three categories, i.e. having preference of park facing and corner, having preference of park facing or corner and non-preferential plot. The plot having preference of park facing and corner fetched bid of Rs.31450/-against the reserve price of Rs.24450/-. The plot having preference of either park facing or corner fetc
The highest bidder is not entitled to the issuance of a Regular Letter of Allotment unless the bid is accepted by the competent authority. The rejection of the bid by the competent authority must be ....
No vested right is established from bid submission; rejection of bid is valid when corporation ensures public interest and current market rates prevail.
The highest bidder at public auctions only has a right of consideration and is subject to evaluation against the reserve price. No concluded contract comes into being until the bid is accepted by the....
Point of Law - Once State decides to grant any right or privilege to others, then there is no escape from rigour of Article 14.
The authority has the right to cancel the highest bid and the bids must be competitive. The authority reserves the right to accept or reject any bid without assigning any reason.
Bidders participating in tender process have no other right except right to equality and fair treatment in matter of evaluation of competitive bids offered by interested persons in response to notice....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.