A party participating in a public auction is bound by the specific time limits and conditions mentioned in the auction notice; unforeseen losses do not entitle the party to an extension of the lease if the auction terms do not provide for such an extension.

ORDER

1.The petitioner had taken the fishing right in Komberi lake, situated at Mittathinna Halli, Komveri Village, Nallampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District through the public auction conducted on 13.01.2023. The period for the fishing right was from 2023-2025.

2.The petitioner alleges two instances which prevented him from reaping profits. The first one, being heavy floods in December 2024, at Dharmapuri District, which led to washout of the fishes from the lake. The second one, being poison being mixed in the lake water, which led to death of all the fishes. The petitioner pleads that he had sustained a loss of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) since he could not fish the seeds which he had planted.

3.Consequently, he gave a representation to the respondents on 19.11.2025 seeking extension of the fishing right by a further period of three years. As no orders were passed, considering his representation, he is before this Court.

4.Heard Mr.M.Tamizavel, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.N.Naveen Kumar, learned counsel appearing for R1 and Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal, learned counsel representing Mr.S.Prabakar, learned counsel appearing for R2 & R3.

5.The facts set forth above show that fishing rights had been put up for auction in which the petitioner was successful. The auction notice itself specifically states that the period for which the auction had been conducted was from 2023 to 2025. There is no provision in the conditions of the auction, as seen in Page Nos. 16-17 of the typed set of papers, enabling the authority to extend the period of the fishing right auctioned. When the petitioner participated in the auction, he was well aware that his right to exploit the resource expires in 2025.

6.The circumstances pleaded by the petitioner are not those which enable the respondents to extend the lease.

7.Mr. M.Tamizavel states that the respondents have identified a third party to whom they want to grant the fishing right for subsequent period without taking the auction route. Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal states that in terms of the applicable rules and procedures, the fishing rights will be brought for auction and the petitioner is free to participate in the same.

8. In case, the petitioner has suffered any damages in this regard or has any other claim, it is always open to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Civil Court claiming damages.

9.In the light of the above discussion, the writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.