BALRAJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF J & K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioner seeks the following relief:-

(2.) The case of the petitioners is that tenders were invited by the respondent No. 4 for auction of parking contract for the parking place Opposite Municipal Committee Katra Office Counter No. 2 from the interested persons. The tenders were opened by the constituted committee and found that the petitioner was the highest bidder to Rs.10,51,000.00 against the bid of ten lakhs minimum bid. The tender was allotted to the petitioner on 10/4/2018 for a period of one year commencing from 1/4/2018 to 31/3/2019. After the allotment of contract for charging parking fee at Municipal Committee Katra office Counter No. 2, the petitioner deposited an amount of Rs.5.30 lakhs in favour of respondent No. 4 on 11/4/2018. The respondent No. 3 without giving any notice to the petitioner unilaterally cancelled the contract/tender of converting counter No. 2 interstate charted stand into commercial parking on 24/4/2018 vide order No. PS/DC/Rsi/04/119-22. Before approaching this Court, the petitioner also made a representation to the respondent No.4, wherein a request was made for allowing him to conduct the smooth functioning of the parking place but the respondent No. 4 paid no heed to the request made by the petitioner. The respondent No. 4 vide its communication No. MC/K/2018-19/1255-57 dtd. 7/9/2018 addressed to respondent No. 2 whereby the respondent No. 4 has put forth all the factual position regarding the parking contract at Counter No. 2 Katra. The respondent No. 4 further sought direction from the respondent No. 2 to pass fresh directions in the matter. Despite the issuance of aforesaid communication, nothing has been communicated to the petitioner and the earnest payment/security deposited with the respondents is still lying with the respondents without any lawful justification and the respondents are bound to return the said amount along with interest @ 12% per annum to the petitioner. The respondents have violated the terms and conditions of the tender by cancelling the tender without any prior notice and they have also not explained as to how and why the respondents have cancelled the tender of the petitioner, which has compelled the petitioner to approach this Court through the medium of instant petition.

(3.) During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner would be satisfied if this writ petition be disposed of thereby directing the respondents to consider the grievance of the petitioner within a stipulated time. His statement is taken on record. There is no legal impediment in granting such a relief.