PANKAJ KUMAR JAISWAL,ALOK MATHUR,J. - (1.) Heard Sri Prem Shanker, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri H.P.Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent nos. 1 and 3 and Sri N.C.Mehrotra, learned Counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 4 and 5.
(2.) By means of the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are seeking for quashment of the impugned auction notice dated 02.11.2019 issued by the respondent nos. 3, 4 and 5 so far as it relates to shop no. 7, 8, 12, 17 and 18 situated at Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow as well as ante-date cancellation orders issued as against the petitioner nos.1 and 2 on 10.10.2019 (posted on 05.11.2019, received on 06.11.2019) and cancellation order dated 23.10.2019 (posted on 05.11.2019 received on 06.11.2019) respectively alongwith other reliefs.
(3.) The petitioners' in whose favour the allotment of shops were made through an auction pursuant to the advertisement dated 15.11.2019 in daily newspapers whereby inviting tenders and kiosk in first modern Wholesale Pusp Mandi Apna Bazar Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow on certain conditions, thereafter allotment letters were issued in their favour on 11.01.2010. One of the allotment letter/order is at page 41 of the paper book and condition nos. 3, 4 and 5 reads as under:- ...[VARNACULAR TEXT UMITTED]... The petitioners failed to fulfilled the conditions mentioned in the allotment letter/order. Neither the petitioners obtained any licence nor they paid the monthly fees and therefore, first a show cause notice was issued on 09.03.2011 on the ground that as per Rule 4 (7) of the Flower Mandi Shops Allotment Regulation 2009, (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Regulation 2009") the petitioners failed to complete the formalities within a period of 15 days from the date of issuance of allotment order as required, nor obtained any licence and thus violating the Regulation and Rules framed under the Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964. It is also alleged that work ought to have been started within a period of 15 days from the date of allotment as per Rule 4 (6) of the Regulation 2009 but the same was not completed nor they deposited the Mandi fees thus, violated the conditions of allotment. The third reasons that the petitioners failed to deposit the rent nor executed the rent agreement within a period of 15 days as required and thus violated the Rule 10.3 of the Regulation 2009, therefore notices has been issued under Section 9, 17 of the Mandi Adhiniyam 1964 and they were found guilty under Section 37 of the Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964 and were directed to file reply failing which, allotment will be cancelled which was duly replied. Second show cause notice was issued on 15.03.2017 which was also replied, thereafter allotment has been cancelled and their shops have been put to auction. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to various provisions and facts mentioned in the petition and has submitted that due to the fault on behalf of the respondents, they could not execute the agreement although they are ready to deposit the rent and therefore, the impugned orders may be quashed. ;