Vatash Sharma Vs. Indore Development Authority & another
Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
WRIT PETITION, 18012,18476 of 2021, Judgment Date: Oct 28, 2021
Law laid down -
1. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 - Madhya Pradesh Vikas Pradhikarano Ki Sampatiyon Ka Prabandhan Tatha Vyayan Niyam, 2018 - Vyayan Niyam prescribes the method for disposal of the property of Development Authority. The IDA issued NIT for third and fourth time respectively. After cancelling the bid of petitioners, the new NIT was issued based on the fact that after end of Corona curfew, the market value of shops is enormously enhanced. This is not the factor on which a new NIT can be issued or previous NIT can be annulled as per the Vyayan Niyam .
2. Interpretation of statutes – If statute prescribes a thing to be done in a particular manner, it has to be done in the same manner and other methods are forbidden. It is equally settled that if language of statute is plain and unambiguous, it should be given effect to irrespective of its consequences.
3. The judicial review in contractual/tender matter - The judicial review is limited to examine the illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety i.e. the decision making process. On the touch stone of Wednesbury Principles also the impugned decision can be tested.
4. The rejection of bid of H-1 - Rejection is solely based on the assumption that value of properties enhanced post Covid period which will fetch more revenue, which will be in the interest of IDA. When authorities are not governed by any statutory provision like Vyayan Niyam, they may have a greater discretion to take a decision in this regard in a judicious manner but when statutory provision regulates decision making process, the authorities have to act strictly in consonance with the statutory provisions.
5. The highest bidder - A letter dated 15/3/2021 informing him that he is the highest bidder and website remark that bid is “accepted” does not mean that petitioner’s bid was ‘approved’ by the competent authority. The Vyayan Niyam makes it clear that only after satisfaction of competent authority (Board in this case) the bid can be treated to be “approved”. In absence there of the aforesaid communications will not result into “approval” of the bid.
6. The right of the highest bidder – Merely because a party is the highest bidder, no enforceable right is created in his favour. It is open to the competent authority to decline said bid based on justifiable reasons. However, such bid cannot be rejected arbitrarily and in a capricious manner.
7. Practice and procedure - The petitioner filed a writ petition which was permitted to be withdrawn with the liberty to file a properly constituted petition. The averment of previous petition which was not properly constituted and permitted to be withdrawn, have lost significance when new petition is filed. Apart from the above, any averment of previous petition which runs contrary to the statute (Vyayan Niyam) will not operate as Estoppel against the petitioner.
8. Irrelevant consideration/ discrimination - The Vyayan Niyam do not permit IDA to fix a rate 30% over and above the reserve price while issuing third or second NITs. Indeed Rule 6(vi) permits the IDA to reduce the reserve price. The respondents accepted five bids mentioned in the Chart wherein the bid price was admittedly below the 30% ceiling mentioned in the Resolution dated 27/7/2021. Merely because NITs for those shops were issued prior in time, those shops cannot be treated to be belonging to a different class altogether. There is no reasonable classification and, therefore, petitioners were subjected to discrimination in the matter of fixing a price over and above the reserve price.
Vatash Sharma Vs. Indore Development Authority & another
Aditya Jain Vs. Indore Development Authority & another