IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONTEMPT) NO. 1107 of 2023 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION/24959/2022 ========================================================== GUJARAT SECONDARY AND HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION BOARD, Versus MOGAL DILAWARBHAI KASAMBHAI PROPRIETOR OF AMINA TRADERS & ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR AD OZA(515) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 BAILABLE WARRANT SERVED for the Opponent(s) No. 1 MEHUL A SURATI(7870) for the Opponent(s) No. 2 MR VISHAL N SOLANKI(11628) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s) No. 3 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA Date : 05/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA)

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Meet Shah for learned advocate Mr. A.D.Oza for the applicant and learned advocate Mr. Vishal Solanki for opponent No.1.

2. This application is filed for contempt of undertaking filed by the respondent before this Court in view of the order dated 02.05.2023 passed in Special Civil Application No. 24959/2022.

3. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court [Coram:Hon’ble Ms. Justice Sangeeta K. Vishen and Hon’ble Ms. Justice Nisha M. Thakore] passed the following order on

05.03.2024:

“1. The applicant by way of captioned application, has alleged willful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 02.05.2023 so also undertaking dated 03.05.2023 given by the opponent No.1 in the captioned writ petition. The auction was conducted by the applicant Board and the opponent No.3 was declared as successful bidder. Being aggrieved that, the opponent No.1,preferred a writ petition being Special Civil Application No.24959 of 2022 seeking direction to the respondent to conduct re-

auction.

2. During the pendency of the writ petition, it appears that the auction was conducted in the Court on 02.05.2023. The offer was made by the opponent to the tune of Rs. 2,52,00,000/-. Since it was the highest offer, that the order was passed. The Division Bench, was of the opinion that the petition is required to be considered and tender awarded in favour of the opponent No.3, was quashed and set aside. At the same time, the petitioner was directed to file an undertaking. This Court has, raised pointed query to the learned advocates appearing for the petitioner and the respondents as to whether the parties are ready to go for the auction in the Court itself. Upon the readiness and willingness shown by the parties, the auction was conducted and the opponent No.1 was declared as a successful bidder. Apropos the order passed on 02.05.2023, that the opponent had filed an undertaking dated 03.05.2023 clearly agreeing that he shall not back out from the highest offer of Rs.2,52,00,000/- and that he is ready and willing to execute the agreement with the Board for the tender in question.

3. Pertinently, as per the direction contained in para 7 of the order, the opponent was to file an undertaking and a copy was to be supplied to the learned advocate appearing for the Board.

It was only if the undertaking was not filed that the offer accepting the tender in favour of the opponent No.3, was directed to be revived. Upon filing of the undertaking, the Board, was to grant a contract, followed by execution of the contract. Since the opponent had filed an undertaking, the revival, was out of question and the Board was to proceed further, granting the contract, which it did by addressing a letter dated 10.05.2023, requiring the opponent to execute the contract and deposit of the amount. Except filing an undertaking, the opponent neither executed the contract nor paid the amount. It is this lapse on the part of the opponent, which has led to the filing of the present application.

4. From the series of the orders passed by this Court, it appear that the opponent, has taken the Court very lightly. Though apology has been tend