(1)

1011-wp-329-2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

1011 WRIT PETITION NO.329 OF 2021

MAULI CEMENT AND BUILDING ATERIALS SUPPLIERS MANTHA

THR ITS PROPRIETOR KAILAS DEVIDAS BORADE

..PETITIONER

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ..RESPONDENTS

…

Mr. Devdatt P. Palodkar, Advocate for the

Petitioner.

Mr. A. R. Kale, AGP for Respondents-State.

…

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &

SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATED : 05^th FEBRUARY, 2021.

PER COURT:-

1.

We have heard Mr. Palodkar, learned

counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.P.

2.

Mr. Palodkar, learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that auction of sand spots is

regulated by Government Resolution dated

03.09.2019. The upset price of the sand spots is

to be fixed as per the terms of the Government

Resolution dated 03.09.2019. The prelude to the

Government Resolution dated 03.09.2019 is order

passed by the Division Bench at Nagpur in Public

Interest Litigation No.110/2018 dated 07.12.2018.

According to the learned counsel if a river flows

from various districts, then the upset price for

auction of sand spot has to be the same. The

Collectors of the various districts have to hold a

joint meeting to fix the upset price. However, the

(2)

1011-wp-329-2021

tender notice issued by the Collectors of various

districts would show that the upset price has been

fixed distinctly. In Aurangabad the upset price is

fixed at Rs.1092/- per brass, in Jalna the same is

fixed at Rs.2168/- per brass and in Parbhani it is

fixed at Rs.2639/- per brass. The price at

Buldhana is fixed at Rs.1276/- per brass. The

action of fixing the upset price in the tender

notice demonstrates non-application of mind by the

respondents and non-adherence to the Government

Resolution. Fixing of uniform upset price of sand

spot on one river flowing in different districts is

essential condition for issuing tender notice. It

maintains level playing field for the bidder and

also reduces concentrated excavation of sand in a

particular district. The learned counsel to

buttress his submissions relies on Clause 8 (C) of

the Government Resolution dated 03.09.2019.

3.

Mr. Kale, learned A.G.P. for respondents

submits that the petitioner is misinterpreting the

Clauses of Government Resolution dated 03.09.2019.

If the sand spots in two districts are situated

jointly, then only the Collectors of the two

districts have to fix the upset price in

consultation and as per directions of the

Divisional Commissioner. The learned A.G.P.

further contends that in Buldhana district Dhamna,

Khadakpurna and Purna rivers flow, in Hingoli

district the rivers are Kayadhu and Purna and

rivers in auction notice of Parbhani are Godavari,

(3)

1011-wp-329-2021

Purna and Dudhna. Not a single sand spot in

Aurangabad district is the common / joint sand spot

in the river flow of adjacent district. There are

separate sand spots and as such independently the

upset prices are fixed by respondents in accordance

with Clause 8 (1)(A) of the Government Resolution

dated 03.09.2019. The petitioner has not given

details of rivers. Clause 8(C) of the Government

Resolution in question cannot be interpreted in a

manner the petitioner seeks to rely. The upset

price has been rightly fixed. Calculated on the

basis of 6% increase on the previous financial

years upset price multiplied by the available

quantity of sand in the said sand spot, as such,

there would be difference in the upset price in the

sand spot fixed at the different districts and

places.

4.

We have considered the submissions

canvassed by the learned counsel for the parties.

5.

The Government has laid guidelines under

its executive powers pursuant to the Government

Resolution dated 03.09.2019 fixing the upset price

for auction of sand spots. Clause 8(A) and (C) of

the said Government Resolution would be relevant.

Clause 8(A) permits the fixation of upset price by

enhancing 6% price to the one fixed last year.