High Court Kerala High Court

Mathachan C.V. vs The Executive Engineer on 19 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
Mathachan C.V. vs The Executive Engineer on 19 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 8002 of 2010(A)


1. MATHACHAN C.V., S/O.VARKEY,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA STATE HOUSING

                For Petitioner  :SRI.VINOD VALLIKAPPAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :19/03/2010

 O R D E R
                 T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
                ----------------------------------------------
                    W.P.(C)No.8002 OF 2010
             -----------------------------------------------------
           DATED THIS THE 19th DAY OF MARCH, 2010

                            J U D G M E N T

The petitioner responded to Exhibit P1 auction notice issued

by the Kerala State Housing Board for auctioning plot/shops in

Sultan Bathery at Wayanad. It is submitted that the petitioner

participated in the auction and quoted Rs.33,51,515/- for 12.23

cents of land and four shops situated in 10.98 cents. The Writ

Petition is filed seeking for a direction to the respondents to

consider his bid and accept the same.

2. The learned Standing Counsel on getting instructions

submitted that even though tender notice was issued, only one

person responded, being the petitioner herein, and he has quoted

an amount of Rs.33,51,515/- as evident from Exhibit P3. But the

said amount is below the official bid amount fixed by the

respondents at Rs.36,25,000/-. It is submitted that therefore the

amount quoted by the petitioner is not acceptable and again

fresh auction will have to be conducted. It is also pointed out

that there were no other bidders because of adjustments

W.P.(C)No.8002/10 -2-

between various bidders. It is in these circumstances that

respondents 1 and 2 have decided to put the properties for

auction afresh.

3. In that view of the matter, this Court will not be

justified at this stage to compel the respondents to accept the bid

submitted by the petitioner and confirm the same. If a fresh

auction notice is published, the petitioner will be free to

participate in that auction.

With the above observation, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
JUDGE

dsn