K. VEERAPUTHIRAN Vs. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ Petition has been filed seeking for a Mandamus to issue a fresh auction notification in the manner known to law to install shops and variety of entertainment galleries in the ground situated behind the Kottaimariyamman temple, Dindigul during the Masi festival of the temple scheduled to be held from 12.02.2015 to 03.03.2015 taking into representation dated 29.12.2014.

(2.) According to the petitioner, the festival is being conducted for more than 20 years at Kottaimariyamman temple, Dindigul. During the festival, the ground belonging to the Sport Development Authority is being used to install various shops and giant wheel and so on, for which the tender should be called for as per the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act 1998. (for short ' the Act'). Since it was not done as per the Act, the petitioner constrained to file a Writ Petition in W.P.(MD).No. 1621 of 2014, in which a direction was issued to the respondents therein to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 07.01.2014. Inspite of that, the respondent did not issue any tender publication and awarded the last year tender to one Mr.Ramesh Murali vide the proceedings of the respondents dated 03.01.2014. Even then, the respondents did not rectify the mistake, which resulted filing an another Writ Petition in W.P.(MD).No. 3716 of 2014 by the petitioner seeking a fresh tender. The said Writ Petition was disposed of, by this Court on 06.03.2014, in which a direction was issued to the respondents therein to receive the demand draft offered by this petitioner for a sum of Rs. 20 Lakhs for awarding the contract and transfer the licence granted in favour of the said Ramesh Mruali to this petitioner. In fact, the petitioner was forced to file another Writ Petition in W.P.(MD).No. 4400 of 2014 seeking to grant the licence to him.

(3.) Against the order of the Writ Petition in W.P.(MD).No. 4400 of 2014, the said Ramesh Murali, the highest bidder filed a Writ Appeal in W.A. (MD).No. 449 of 2014. It was disposed of by this Court on 13.06.2014. In the said Writ Appeal, this Court had condemned the activities of the respondents therein and clearly stated that as the successful bidder had by the time enjoyed the fruits of the tender in question, setting aside of the tender awarded to the said Ramesh Murali would cause numerous anomalies and therefore, the said Ramesh Mruali was directed to pay the difference amount, namely, the amount offered by this petitioner, Rs. 20 Lakhs and the amount offered by the said Ramesh Mruali for awarding such contract. It is also represented by this petitioner that the difference amount as directed by the Division Bench of this Court has not been collected by the respondents, as on date. Noting of the irregularities that had taken placed in the tender, the Division Bench of this Court has posed a serious question to the authorities concerned, which are as follows:-