[2026:RJ-JD:12038]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6122/2025 Umesh Kumar Vyas S/o Shri Gouri Shankar Vyas, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of 218, Ward No.15, Near LTM Katla, Ummedpura, District Phalodi.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Director, Local Self Development Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur

2. Municipal Council, Phalodi Through Its Commissioner.

3. District Collector, Phalodi.

4. Additional District Collector-Cum-Administrator, Municipal Council, Phalodi.

5. Sub-Divisional Officer-Cum-Commissioner, Municipal Council, Phalodi. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Bohra For Respondent(s) : Ms. Meenal Singhvi for Mr. Rajesh Panwar, AAG.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

13/03/2026

1. By way of filing the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

“I. by or an appropriate writ, order directions, the impugned minutes of meeting dated 04.12.2024 (Annex.5) and e-. auction notice dated 17/18.02.2025 (Annex.6) passed by the respondents, qua the plot No.9 (Warehouse), situated in Santosh Nagar Aawasiya Scheme, Phalodi may kindly be quashed and set-aside.

II. Further, by an appropriate writ, order or directions, the respondents may kindly be directed to accept the petitioner's of plot No.9 (Warehouse), situated in Santosh Nagar Aawasiya Scheme, Phalodi.

III. Pending the petition, if any order is passed or any action is taken prejudicial to the interest of petitioner; same may kindly be quashed and set aside.

IV. Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

V. Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent – Municipal Council, Phalodi issued an e-auction notice dated 30.10.2024 for allotment of various sizes/categories of plots situated in the residential/commercial schemes floated by it from time to time. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner participated in the e-auction proceedings for Warehouse No.9 situated at Santosh Nagar. The reserve price for the said warehouse was fixed at Rs.24,82,007/-. The petitioner submitted a bid of Rs.65,41,997/-, which was much higher than the reserve price fixed by the respondent – Municipal Council. After completion of the auction proceedings, the petitioner was declared H-1 (highest bidder).

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent – Municipal Council, Phalodi, in its meeting dated 04.12.2024, took a decision to cancel the entire e-auction proceedings and to conduct fresh auction proceedings for the said plot on the ground that in the previous auction proceedings conducted for Warehouse No.1 (Plot No.1) of the same scheme, the highest bid received was Rs.1,91,00,000/-, which is much higher than the bid submitted by the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that after taking the decision to cancel the auction proceedings conducted pursuant to the e-auction notice dated 30.10.2024, the respondent – Municipal Council issued a fresh e-auction notice dated 17/18.02.2025, again including the plot in dispute, i.e., Warehouse No.9 situated at Santosh Nagar, while keeping the same reserve price of Rs.24,82,007/-.

5. Learned counsel submitted that the reason assigned by the respondents for cancelling the earlier auction proceedings, namely that a higher bid was expected for the plot in question, is illegal and arbitrary. He further submitted that once the bid offered by the petitioner was found to be higher and well above the reserve price, the same ought to have been accepted.

6. It was also contended that as per Condition No.4 of the e- auction notice dated 30.10.2024, the bid submitted by the petitioner was required to be accepted or rejected within five working da