Komal Aggarwal and Anr v. Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and Ors

ARUN PALLI, J.

For, learned counsel for the parties submit that the matter in I attest to the accuracyi sansdue in this bunch of 41 petitions is identical, these are being disposed of by

CWP-1417-2023 & other connected matters -9-2024:PHHC:035639-DB

a common order and judgment. However, the facts are being derived from CWP No.1417 of 2023. The petitioners have prayed for the following substantive relief:- "Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction especially in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to issue LOI to the petitioners being successful bidder in accordance with Clause 30 of the e-auction policy dated

20.07.2022 (i.e. Annexure P-1) of HSVP and further, declaring the action of the respondents refunding the amount deposited by the petitioners without any rhyme or reason as illegal and against the policy; AND/OR To issue a writ of Prohibition restraining the respondents from auctioning the SCO (S64), Sector 12, Faridabad in the e-auction to be held on 28.01.2023 in furtherance of advertisement dated 12.01.2023."

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that pursuant to the advertisement dated 10.12.2022 (P-2), Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran

(HSVP) sought to make allotments of residential, commercial and institutional properties in all developed Urban Estates of Haryana by way of e-auction. In terms of the e-auction Policy dated 20.07.2022 (P-1), the petitioners jointly registered for SCO (S64) in Sector 12, Faridabad, and deposited 5% of the reserve price, i.e. Rs.15,23,600/- (plus registration fee of Rs.1000/-). The auction was held on 14.12.2022. For, against the reserve price of Rs.3,04,71,200/-, the petitioners submitted the highest bid at Rs.3,05,01,200/-, they were adjudged H-1. And a formal communication, vide e-mail dated 14.12.2022, acknowledging the petitioners being the highest bidders, was issued by the respondent authorities. He asserts that in sync with Clause 32 of Policy (ibid), the petitioners deposited 10% of the AMIT KUMAR

CWP-1417-2023 & other connected matters -10-2024:PHHC:035639-DB

total bid amount, i.e. Rs.15,26,520/- on 17.12.2022. Thus, the total amount deposited by the petitioners with the authorities was Rs.30,50,120/-. For the petitioners, thus far, had complied with the terms/conditions of the auction and were ready/willing to deposit the balance consideration and perform their part of the contract, they had a legitimate expectation of being formally allotted the said site. However, rather than issuing the allotment letter, the respondent authorities credited the amount deposited by the petitioners in their bank account on 10.01.2023. It is urged that apparently, the action of the respondents was arbitrary and irrational, as neither the petitioners were communicated any reasons for rejection of their bid, nor any formal order was passed by the competent authority. In this regard, he places reliance upon a decision of the Supreme Court in M/s Star Enterprises etc. Vs. City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. and others, 1 ! "#$ SCC %&!,  and a decision of this Court in Sur'a (am Vs. State of )aryana and another, 1 &* +I( ",un'a- and )aryana$ %&%. Response on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 was submitted, wherein claim of the petitioners is seriously disputed. In reference to Clause 17 of the Policy (ibid), it is averred that the authorities were well within their right to accept or reject any bid or withdraw any or all the properties from e-auction or cancel/postpone the e-auction, without assigning any reasons. Further, a bare analysis of the Policy indicates that a clear distinction is made between the successful and the highest bidder. For, neither any letter of intent nor a regular letter of allotment was issued in favour of the petitioners, thus, no concluded contract was entered into between the parties. Not just that, the bid submitted by the petitioners was below the reserve price, which was fixed at Rs.3,76,17,500/-. We had heard learned counsel for the parties at length, when during the course of hearing, they have reached a consensus: since concededly, before rejection of the bids submitted by the petitioners, despite being adjudged H-1, the authorities failed to furnish any reason, as to why and on what grounds, they were compelled to scrap the auction process, nor any formal order was passed by the competent authority, in this regard, it AMIT KUMAR shall be expedient, if these petitions are disposed of, to enable the

CWP-1417-2023 & other connected matters -11-2024:PHHC:035639-DB

respondent authorities, without prejudice to the rights/interest of the parties and their respective pleadings before this Court, to examine the concerns/grievances of the petitioners. And pass necessary orders, in accordance with law. It is also agreed that before any such orders are passed, the petitioners, as also the other stakeholders, would be afforded a hearing. And the petitioners shall also be at liberty to place any fresh material/documents, if so advised, to support/substantiate their claim, provided the same are submitted within two weeks from the date of this order. For a timely decision by the competent authority would secure the mutual interest of the parties to the lis, the necessary orders, in accordance with law, shall be passed within a period of two months from the date of this order. And in all those cases where the authorities, despite rejection of the bids and cancellation of auction, have not yet refunded the amount deposited by the petitioners, the requisite amount shall be refunded, along with interest @ 5.5%, from the date the petitioners-applicants were communicated rejection of their bids till realization of the amount. However, till the formal orders, as indicated above, are passed, the site(s) in question would not be put to auction, creating any third party rights. In the wake of the position sketched out above and the consensus that has been arrived at between the learned counsel for the parties, the petitions are disposed of. Needless to assert that this order shall not constitute an expression of opinion on the merits of the case of either party, for, as indicated earlier, the competent authority shall examine the grievances of the petitioners, strictly in accordance with law.

(ARUN PALLI)k JUDGE

(VIKRAM AGGARWAL) JUDGE

12.03.2024 deepak/ AK Sharma     Whether spea ing!reasoned  "  #es!$o Whether reportable     "  #es!$o k

CWP-1417-2023 & other connected matters -1- 2024:PHHC:035639-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 06.12.2023 Pronounced on: 12.03.2024 1. CWP-1417-2023 Komal Aggarwal and another …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents 2. CWP-6669-2023 Om Parkash …. Petitioner 3. CWP-1897-2023 Virender Kumar Sukhija …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents 4. CWP-1769-2023 Jyoti Arora …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents 5. CWP-2469-2023 Ram Sarup …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents 6. CWP-22063-2020 Shyam Lal …. Petitioner CWP-1417-2023 & other connected matters -2- 2024:PHHC:035639-DB 7. CWP-22723-2020 Sudesh Sharma …. Petitioner 8. CWP-4436-2023 Priyanka Goyal …. Petitioner 9. CWP-2633-2023 Sunil Kumar and another …. Petitioner 10. CWP-2423-2023 Shikha Bhardwaj and others …. Petitioner 11. CWP-1682-2023 Anita Rani …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents 12 CWP-3640-2023 Aditya Karnani …. Petitioner 13. CWP-3191-2023 Anju Gupta …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents CWP-1417-2023 & other connected matters -3- 2024:PHHC:035639-DB 14. CWP-10777-2022 Sarika Soni …. Petitioner 15. CWP-17923-2020 Geeta Sharma …. Petitioner 16. CWP-2797-2023 Muthra Singh and others …. Petitioner 17. CWP-10193-2023 Tulika Jain …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents 18. CWP-11367-2023 Vijaya Rohilla …. Petitioner 19. CWP-1356-2023 Sanchita …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents 20. CWP-30181-2022 Palak Gupta and another …. Petitioners AMIT KUMAR Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents CWP-1417-2023 & other connected matters -4- 2024:PHHC:035639-DB 21. CWP-30192-2022 Neelam Bajaj and another …. Petitioners Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents 22. CWP-3171-2023 Deepika Jain …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents 23. CWP-4056-2023 Hukam Chand Yadav and another …. Petitioners 24. CWP-5853-2023 Ankit Yadav and another …. Petitioners 25. CWP-1876-2023 Jitender Kumar Sharma …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and another …. Respondents 26. CWP-4594-2023 Ruchika …. Petitioner 27. CWP-10684-2023 Anju Gupta …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents CWP-1417-2023 & other connected matters -5- 2024:PHHC:035639-DB 28. CWP-2265-2023 Anita …. Petitioner 29. CWP-2372-2023 Renu Bala …. Petitioner 30. CWP-23921-2023 Jagpal …. Petitioner 31. CWP-2528-2023 Ritu Bhutani …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and another …. Respondents 32. CWP-2585-2023 Sumeet Singh Kullar …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and another …. Respondents 33. CWP-2587-2023 Kiran and others …. Petitioners 34. CWP-7465-2023 Ankit Yadav and another …. Petitioners 35. CWP-8227-2023 Asha …. Petitioner CWP-1417-2023 & other connected matters -6- 2024:PHHC:035639-DB 36. CWP-9399-2023 Simran and another …. Petitioners Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and another …. Respondents 37. CWP-2544-2023 Monika Chopra …. Petitioner Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran and others …. Respondents 38. CWP-2548-2023 Janki …. Petitioner 39. CWP-3053-2023 Malti Sharma …. Petitioner 40. CWP-17830-2022 Harinder Kumar …. Petitioner 41. CWP-8769-2023 Mukesh Saini …. Petitioner CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Sukhmandeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioners in CWP-1417-2023. Mr. Sajjan Singh, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-2423, 2633 and 2372 of 2023. Mr. Parshant Sethi, Advocate AMIT KUMAR for petitioner in CWP-2469-2023. CWP-1417-2023 & other connected matters -7- 2024:PHHC:035639-DB Mr. Aryavart, Advocate, for the petitioner in CWP-1682-2023 Mr. Shubham Saroha, Advocate for the petitioners in CWP-22063 and 22723-2020. Mr. Vaneet Soni, Advocate for