WPMS/588/2021
2021 Latest Caselaw 880 UK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
           AT NAINITAL
       ON THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021
                   BEFORE:
 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
       Writ Petition (M/S) No. 588 of 2021
BETWEEN:
Prem Singh                              ...Petitioner
     (By Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate)

AND:
Collector/District Magistrate,
Tehri Garhwal                           ... Respondents

     (By Mr. T.S. Phartiyal, learned Additional C.S.C. for the
     State)

                      JUDGMENT

District Magistrate, Tehri Garhwal invited tender from eligible persons for participating in open auction for grant of mining rights under River Training Policy. According to the petitioner, his bid was found to be the highest, but work order has not been issued in his favour.

2. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:-

(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the impugned advertisement dated 03.03.2021 (Annexure No

- 4) issued by the respondent, whereby, the applications were invited to participate in the open auction for the removal of River Bed Material (RBM) in Tehsil-Dhanolti qua the River Training Lot-Dhaulagiri situated in River Badal, Tehsil-Dhanolti, District Tehri Garhwal.

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent to issue appropriate work order in favour of the petitioner pursuant to the highest bid submitted by the petitioner in response to the advertisement dated 03.02.2021 auction held on 22.02.2021 qua for River Training Lot-

Dhaulagiri in River-Badal, Tehsil-Dhanolti, District Tehri Garhwal.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since petitioner's bid was found to be the highest, as such, he is entitled for grant of mining rights but respondents have illegally initiated tender process afresh.

4. Mr. T.S. Phartiyal, learned Additional C.S.C. for the State submits that bid of petitioner was marginally higher than the reserve price fixed by the District Magistrate and there were complaint that due to formation of cartel amongst bidders, adequate price was not quoted by any of the bidders, therefore, decision was taken at the highest level to start tender process afresh.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of the express condition contained in the tender notice that 'all' or 'any' bid can be rejected without assigning any reason, this Court does not find any reason to interfere in the matter.

6. Even otherwise also the bid submitted by the petitioner, even if highest, was not approved/accepted by the competent authority, therefore, petitioner has no legally enforceable right available to him.

7. In such view of the matter, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost.

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.) Aswal