Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J.
It appears that a public auction of the evacuee property in question was made on 30.6.2011. The bid of the petitioner being the highest (namely, Rs.12,26,000/-) was accepted, and in pursuance thereof, the petitioner deposited Rs.3,16,000/- on 30th June, 2011 itself. Receipt regarding deposit has been filed as part of Annexure 4 to the Writ Petition.
It further appears that on 30th June, 2011 itself, an application was filed on behalf of respondent No.7, inter-alia, stating that he could not reach for participating in the auction proceedings in time as certain defects had developed in his motorcycle. The respondent No.7 submitted bid of Rs.14,00,000/-. Thereupon, an order was passed on 30.6.2011 cancelling the acceptance of bid of the petitioner and permitting the respondent No.7 to deposit one-fourth of his bid of Rs.14,00,000/-. Pursuant thereto, the respondent no.7 deposited Rs.3,50,000/-.
It further appears that after making deposit of Rs.3,50,000/-, the respondent No.7 failed to deposit the balance three- fourth amount in respect of his bid. In the circumstances, a report dated 19.11.2011 (Annexure 6 to the Writ Petition) was submitted by the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 before the respondent No.4, placing the aforesaid facts. After considering the said report, the respondent no.4 passed an order dated 22.11.2011 directing that fresh auction be held in respect of the evacuee property in question.
From the narration of the facts above, it is evident that neither the bid of the petitioner nor the bid of the respondent No.7 has been accepted and the property in question is again going to be auctioned pursuant to the said order dated 22.11.2011 passed by the respondent No.4.
In the circumstances, no prejudice has been caused to the petitioner as it is open to the petitioner to participate in the fresh auction proceedings to be held pursuant to the said order dated 22.11.2011.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case for exercising Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
In view of the above, the Writ Petition filed by petitioner is liable to be dismissed, and the same is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 3.1.2012 SKD