Telangana High Court
WP/28757/2009 of Abothula Paparao Vs The Palasa Kasibugga Municipality, on 31 December 2009
MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28757 OF 2009 ORDER: The Palasa Kasibugga Municipality conducted auction of leasehold rights on 24th and 25th of August, 2007 in respect of the shops constructed by it in block No.I. The petitioners in this writ petition and some others emerged as
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
WRIT PETITION No.28757 OF 2009
The Palasa Kasibugga Municipality conducted auction of leasehold rights on 24[th] and 25[th] of August, 2007 in respect of theshops constructed by it in block No.I. The petitioners in this writpetition and some others emerged as the highest bidders inrespect of the concerned shops. The results of the auction wereapproved by the Municipal Council and thereafter, quite a largenumber of successful bidders were delivered possession of therespective shops. However, the petitioners were not handed overthe shops, as regards which, they emerged as highest bidders. They have approached this Court ventilating their grievance.
The learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation submitsthat the auction was conducted and the petitioners were emergedas the highest bidders. However, a semblance of justification issought to be pleaded for not handing over the shops to thepetitioners, stating that instructions were received from the DistrictCollector by making reference to certain writ petitions. It is alsostated that the Municipal Council is yet to take a decision asregards the shops, for which, the petitioners are highest bidders.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and thelearned Standing counsel for the Corporation.
As observed earlier, leasehold rights in respect of quite alarge number of shops in block-1 were put to auction on 24[th] and 25[th] of August, 2007. In case, there was any impediment orirregularity in the auction, the entire process ought to have beencancelled or redone. The very fact that the Municipal Council hasapproved the result of the auction discloses that no irregularity hastaken place.
Once the highest bids in respect of the respective shopswere approved by the Municipal Council and the bidders havedeposited the stipulated amounts, there cannot be any justificationfor not handing over the shops to them. The action of theMunicipal Council not only amounts to arbitrariness but alsoreflects discrimination. It cannot choose to hand over the shops tosome and deny the facility to others, since all the highest biddersstand on the same footing. As a matter of fact, the Municipalityhas lost income for all these months on account of non-executionof lease deeds. The person, who is responsible for such state ofaffairs, deserves to be proceeded against.
The writ petition is accordingly allowed, and the Municipalityis directed to hand over the shops to the petitioners who haveemerged as the highest bidders and deposited the requisiteamounts, within two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy ofthis order. There shall be no order as to costs.
_____________________
L.NARASIMHA
REDDY,J
Dt:31.12.2009
Note: Issue cc in one week.(B/o)
kdl