Public contracts must be granted through proper advertisement and public auction to ensure transparency and compliance with Article 14 of the Constitution.

M. KATJU, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filled against the impugned order dated 14. 5. 2002 Annexure-1 to the writ petition.

( 2 ) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

( 3 ) IT has been alleged in the writ petition that the Nagar Palika Parishad, Chandpur, Bijnor in its meeting held on 18. 3. 2002 decided to hold auction for giving various contracts. The advertisement for the auction was published in the newspaper bijnor Times and also announced by loudspeaker. Photocopy of the auction notice is Annexure-2 to the writ petition.

( 4 ) IN paragraph 6 of the writ petition, it is stated that on 26. 3. 2002 all auctions were held but as far as the auction of the right to collect Tehbazari is concerned, it appears that no auction was held on the basis of the said advertisement or any other advertisement. Hence, the matter was referred to the Nagar Palika Parishad which in its meeting held on 30. 3. 2002 considered the report of the auctioning officer and scrutinized the various applications and accepted the highest offer of Rs. 12 lacs given by the petitioner. True copy of the proceedings of the Nagar Palika parishad dated 30. 3. 2002 is Annexure-4 to the writ petition.

( 5 ) IT appears that one Vakil Ahmad filed a complaint against this grant of collecting Tehbazari to the petitioner and hence, the impugned order Annexure-1 was passed by the Commissioner. It may be mentioned that the complainant has given an offer of Rs. 14,50,000 for grant of the contract, and the Commissioner passed an order that if the complainant deposits a sum of Rs. 14,50,000 within a week, the contract shall be cancelled and a fresh auction be held for grant of contract for realisation of Tehbazari. If the complainant does not deposit such amount the contract of the petitioner for Rs. 12 lacs shall be continued vide Annexure-1 to the petition.

( 6 ) A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Nagar Palika Parishad, Chandpur. In paragraph 6 of the same, it is stated that on 26. 3. 2000 all the auctions which had been advertised in bijnor Times on 22. 3. 2002 were held e. g. theka of hides and bones of dead animals, theka fee regarding slaughter house, licence fee for cycle and rickshaw etc. However, the auction for grant of theka to collect Tehbazari was not held because nobody came forward for taking such theka and the auction officer felt that there is some deliberate attempt for manipulating the auction of tehbazari by the contractors of the locality and due to this reason nobody was coming forward for offering any bid: Hence the auction officer referred the matter to the Nagar Palika Parishad, chandpur. In the meantime, some contractors came forward to submit their written offer by filing their applications for grant of theka of Tehbazari for the year 2002-2003 and total of four contractors made offers by filing their applications before the Board in the meeting. The names of such contractors are given in paragraph 6 of the counter-affidavit. Hence, the theka in question was given to the petitioner for Rs. 12 lacs which was the hightest offer.

( 7 ) A counter-affidavit has also been filed on behalf of one Khursheed Anwar who has filed an impleadment application which we have allowed. In paragraph 2 of the said counter-affidavit, it is stated that Khursheed Anwar was a necessary party in the writ petition but he has not been impleaded. He a|so wanted to participate in the auction for contract of Tehbazari but no auction took place on the spot with the collusion of the respondents and the so-called auction was manipulated. Khursheed Anwar gave an application to the respondent No. 1 who directed the a. D. M. , Bijnor to submit his report and on that the impugned order was passed. However, the respondent No. 4 did not allow Khursheed Anwar to deposit the requisite amount. It is alleged in paragraph 10 of the counter-affidavit that the respondent No. 4 the Executive Officer, Nagar palika Parishad has colluded with the petitioner and hence he d