C O M M O N O R D E R

Since the facts and the reliefs sought for are almost identical, these Writ Petitions are disposed of by a common judgment.

2. The Writ Petition Nos.36137 of 2016 and 11595 of 2017 have been filed by M/s. HVL Industries, a trader in Steel, which had taken part in the e-auction sale of steel, conducted by the sole respondent namely Salem Steel Plant in WP No.36137 of 2016 / the first respondent in WP No.11595 of 2017. The Salem Steel Plant notified e-auction sale of commercial quality stainless steel from their plant on 29.08.2016. The buyers were permitted to inspect the products between 06.09.2016 and 08.09.2016. The auction was held on 09.09.2016. The petitioner in the above Writ Petitions has deposited a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) and it was a successful bidder at the highest bid for Rs.99,58,753/-.

3. As per the terms of the e-auction, an Additional Security Deposit (ASD) of Rs.8,42,423/- was deposited by the petitioner. The sale order was issued on 15.09.2016, requiring the petitioner to pay the balance due by 29.09.2016. The petitioner was also required to clear the materials in 14 lots on or before 06.10.2016. The terms of the auction also provided for extension of time for payment of the amounts due and the power to extend was restricted to three days subject to an additional payment of Rs.500/- per lot per day of extension granted.

4. By 01.10.2016, the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.31,62,000/-

including EMD and ASD and the petitioner had cleared the quantity of Steel proportionate to the amount deposited. The request of the petitioner for extension of time was rejected by the respondent. The petitioner was however permitted to clear the quantity of Steel proportionate to the amount paid by the petitioner on or before 10.10.2016. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had cleared the quantity of steel in proportion to the amounts paid by the petitioner. A request for conciliation made by the petitioner was also rejected by the Salem Steel Plant and the contract was cancelled by the email dated 12.10.2016. Consequent upon the cancellation of the contract EMD and ASD were also forfeited and the petitioner was debarred from participating in further auctions for a period of six months.

5. Contending that the action of the respondent in cancelling the contract, forfeiting the Earnest Money Deposit and Additional Security Deposit and debarring the petitioner from participating in future auctions for a period of six months is arbitrary, unjust and discriminatory, the petitioner came up with the first Writ Petition in WP No.36137 of 2016. While admitting the said Writ Petition, this Court had granted an interim order of Status-quo pending disposal of the Writ Petition. The said interim order granted on 14.10.2016 was extended periodically.

6. Subsequently, the Salem Steel Plant published a notification for another e-auction on 12.04.2017. The days for inspection were fixed between 15.04.2017 and 18.04.2017, the on-line auction was to be held on 20.04.2017. With an intent to participate in the auction, the petitioner had deposited Rs.5,00,000/- towards EMD. The petitioner was also allowed to download the General and Special Terms and Conditions of contract. There were some minor variation in the lots that were put up for sale and the same was notified on 20.04.2017. However, the petitioner was not able to log into the on-line portal when it attempted to make its bid on 20.04.2017. The petitioner sent an email at about 3.00 p.m. on 20.04.2017 seeking reasons for denial of permission to the petitioner to participate in the e-auction.

7. Claiming that the action of the respondent namely the Salem Steel Plant in not allowing the petitioner to take part in the auction that took place on 20.04.2017, inasmuch as, the six months period of debarment imposed by the communication dated 12.10.2016 had expired, the petitioner has filed the second Writ Petition in WP 11595 of 2017, seeking a