AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner seeks for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondent Municipality Narasaraopet, Guntur District in conducting auction held on 3-4-1999 for collection of market fee relating to sundry market without issuing notification as illegal and to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the auction held on 3-4-1999 to collect market fee.
The petitioner states that pursuant to the auction notification dated 25-2-1999 auction was held on 15-3-1999 and the petitioner offered bid of Rs.3,56,000/- but the respondents cancelled the said auction and accordingly the petitioner has been intimated by the notice dated 31-3-1999 rejecting the offer as per the resolution of the Municipality dated 31-3-1999.
It is further submitted that auction was held on 3-4-1999 and there was no wide publicity and therefore the auction held on 3-4-1999 shall be declared as illegal.
The second respondent filed counter stating that the bid amount offered by the petitioner to collect market fee for the period from 1-4-1999 to 31-3-2000 for Rs.3,56,000/- was lesser and therefore the auction was cancelled and fresh notification was issued on 1-4-1999 fixing the date of auction as 3-4-1999 at 11 a.m. in the Office of the Municipal Commissioner of the second respondent and a wide publicity was given by the Municipality by beat of tom tom and copies of the said notices were also given to several persons and obtained their signatures.
It is stated by the respondent No.2 in para 3 of the counter that wide publicity was given on 31-3-1999 and 2-4-1999 about the intention of the Municipality for reauction of market fee in respect of sundry market and as a matter of fact the petitioner also participated in the auction conducted on 3-4-1999 and therefore it is not correct to state that no notice was given nor any wide publicity was made. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as he participated in the auction and therefore the third respondent herein who has quoted Rs.4,35,000/- was declared as the highest bidder.
In view of the averment that the petitioner has also participated in the reauction held on 3-4-1999 and also in view of the fact that the petitioner is not prepared to make his offer above Rs.4,35,000/- which was quoted by the highest bidder the third respondent, I am not inclined to exercise discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Having regard to the facts of the case, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief in the writ petition in. view of the categorical statement made by the Commissioner of the Municipality, the second respondent that the petitioner has also participated in the auction conducted on 3-4-1999 and even now the petitioner is prepared to give more offer than the 3rd respondent.
Accordingly, in the result, the writ petition is dismissed and the interim stay granted by this Court stands vacated. No costs.