Priti Sharma vs State Of Haryana And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 11098 P&H

                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:095531-DB




                                   Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:095531 -DB

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                      AT CHANDIGARH

(114)                                               CWP-15825-2023
                                                    Decided on : 27.07.2023

Priti Sharma

                                                                       ......Petitioner(s)
                                           Versus

State of Haryana & others

                                                                   ......Respondent(s)


CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA
        HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN

Present:       Mr.Bhanu Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

               Mr.Pankaj Kundra, Advocate, for
               Mr.Deepak Sabherwal, Advocate, for respondent Nos.2 & 3.

                                   *****

G.S. Sandhawalia, J. (Oral)

Challenge in the present writ petition, filed under Articles

226/227 of the Constitution of India, is to the non-acceptance of the bid though

being the highest bidder during the auction conducted on 10.03.2023 in respect

of plot No.3838 of 4 marlas situated at Urban Estate, 14P-II, Hisar.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that she deposited the 10% amount

of the bid in the auction conducted on 10.03.2023 being the highest bidder and

the letter of intent should have been issued but it was not done. The amount

of Rs.6,15,390/- was refunded against the said bid and the said plot has now

been put to auction by enhancing the reserve price from Rs.60,33,900/- to

Rs.64,52,900/- without any reason, which is stated to be an arbitrary and

illegal action.

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:095531-DB

Neutral Citation No. 2023:PHHC:095531 -DB

3. We have gone through the detailed terms and conditions for

e-auction supplied by the counsel for respondent Nos.2 & 3 dated 20.05.2021.

A perusal of the same would go on to show that as per Clause 30, after

acceptance of the bid and verification of the documents, the successful bidder

was to be issued letter of intent by the Estate Officer concerned. The

"successful bidder" has been defined under Clause 8(a) to be the one whose

bid has been accepted by the competent authority/respective Committee

empowered to take a decision.

4. From a perusal of the facts of the case, it would be manifest that

the Committee never accepted the bid of the petitioner and the amount had

been refunded and the plot has been put to re-auction at a higher reserve price,

as noticed above. The law stands settled on this issue and reference can be

made to the judgment passed by the Apex Court in Haryana Urban

Development Authority & others Vs. Orchid Infrastructure Developers

P.Ltd., 2017 AIR (SC) 882 wherein it was held that mere participation in the

bid does not give a indefeasible vested right to a person.

5. In such circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that in

the absence of any letter of intent or formal letter of allotment having been

issued, petitioner cannot claim acceptance of his bid amount and seek a writ of

mandamus for issuance of letter of intent for the plot in question. Resultantly,

the present writ petition is dismissed.

                                                (G.S. SANDHAWALIA)
                                                        JUDGE

27.07.2023                                (HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN)
Sailesh                                            JUDGE

             Whether speaking/reasoned :              Yes
             Whether Reportable :                                  No

                                                   Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:095531-DB

                                 2 of 2