ORDER :

FARJAND ALI, J.

Grievance and Facts of S.B. Civil Writ Petitions No. 12881/2015, 12588/2015, 12883/2015, 12884/2015, 12885/2015, 12886/2015, 303/2016, 800/2016-

1. By way of filing the instant petitions, the petitioners collectively assail the arbitrary, unexplained and non- speaking rejection letter dated 13.03.2015 issued by the respondent–Rajasthan Housing Board, whereby the concluded auction proceedings were cancelled despite the petitioners having been declared successful bidders, their earnest money and 10% bid amount having been accepted, and a legitimate expectation of allotment having been created in their favour; such action is alleged to be patently illegal, mechanical and unguided, taken without assigning any reasons, in violation of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, the Rajasthan Housing Board (Disposal of Property) Regulations, 1970 and 1973, and the principles of natural justice, causing grave civil consequences to the petitioners , who were at all times ready and willing to perform their obligations.

COMMON FACTS

2. That the factual matrix of all petitions is identical in all material respects, save and except the individual house numbers, area, bid amount and writ petition numbers, which are set out in the comparative table hereinbelow. Table Showing Petition-wise Factual Variations-

That all the above-captioned writ petitions arise out of a common auction process initiated by the respondent– Rajasthan Housing Board for allotment of constructed residential houses under the Tausar Road Residential Scheme, Nagaur. The respondent Board issued an auction notice inviting sealed bids for allotment of residential houses, shops and residential/commercial plots, stipulating that the residential houses would be allotted to the highest bidders, subject to approval by the competent authority. That pursuant to the said auction notice, each of the petitioners submitted sealed bids for different constructed residential houses under the same scheme, offering amounts substantially higher than the reserve price fixed by the respondent Board, along with the prescribed earnest money.

3. A duly constituted committee of the Rajasthan Housing Board, comprising the representative of the District Collector, Deputy Housing Commissioner (RHB), Bikaner Circle, Assistant Accounts Officer and Resident Engineer, Nagaur Division, scrutinized the bids and, finding the respective petitioners to be the highest bidders, recommended allotment of the concerned residential houses in their favour.

4. That the names of the petitioners were accordingly included in the final list of successful bidders, pursuant whereto each petitioner was directed to deposit 10% of the bid amount within 72 hours, after adjustment of earnest money, which direction was duly complied with by all the petitioners within the stipulated time. As per the auction terms, the remaining bid amount was required to be deposited within 60 days from issuance of a demand letter by the respondent Board.

5. However, despite lapse of considerable time, no demand letters were issued to any of the petitioners. Instead, upon making inquiries and thereafter seeking information under the Right to Information Act, 2005, the petitioners came to know that the proposal for allotment had been rejected by the competent authority vide a common letter dated 13.03.2015, without assigning any reasons, and with an indication that the rejected houses would be put to re-auction.

6. The impugned letter dated 13.03.2015 has thus caused grave prejudice to the petitioners, compelling them to file the present writ petitions.

7. Heard learned counsels present for the parties and gone through the materials available on record.

8. OBSERVATIONS OF THE COURT

9. Upon a careful and anxious consideration of the pleadings, record and rival submissions, this Court finds that the core grievance raised in all the present writ petitions emanates from an identical factual matrix and challenges the same impugned