Division Bench dismissed the writ petition as misconceived, holding that an earlier order dated 24.05.2024 allowed the authority to conduct a fresh auction for a winning bid and the petitioner to participate, rendering the current challenge to an order passed on 22.05.2024 frivolous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:112391-DB
Court No. - 29
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20059 of 2024
Petitioner :- Golden Food Products India Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Kumar Jaiswal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ravi Prakash Pandey,Tejasvi Misra
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
"1. Heard Ms. Kriti Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent No.1 and Sri R.P. Pandey, learned
counsel for the respondent No.2 - Ghaziabad Development Authority (GDA).
2. The present writ petition is preferred praying for the following relief:
"To issue a suitable writ, order or direction nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No.2 to issue a requisite allotment letter, in favour of the Petitioner and execute the sale deed in respect of the property demised in Industrial Plot No.26, Madhuban Bapudham Yojna, Ghaziabad."
3. Sri R.P. Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 - Ghaziabad Development Authority (GDA) has placed instruction/ letter dated 22.05.2024 sent by O.S.D. Incharge, Commercial Property, a copy of which has also been provided to Ms. Kriti Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the bid of the petitioner for the Industrial Plot Number 26 (area 3150.00 sq. meters) under the Madhuban Bapudham Scheme was only Rs.29,500/- per square meter, whereas bids for other plots in the same scheme, reached Rs. 82,000/-, Rs. 83,500/-, and Rs. 121,000/- per square meter. Therefore, petitioner's bid had not been accepted as it is significantly lower compared to the rates of the other plots for Industrial Plot Number 26. In this backdrop, although the technical bid was initially accepted, the auction proceedings were later canceled as the bid did not achieve the highest rate. He further submits that Plot Number 26 will be put up for auction again with extensive publicity and petitioner would be at liberty to participate in the next auction. He submits that the adequate information is already sent and the earnest money/deposit submitted by the petitioner against the aforesaid plot by demand draft number 375073 dated 02.02.2024, issued by SBI, Ghaziabad, amounting to Rs.80,64,000.00, has been returned to the petitioner.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the petitioner does not have indefeasible right to insist upon for execution of sale deed in favour of the petitioner. Needless to say that authority is at liberty to proceed for fresh auction and the petitioner is also at liberty to participate in the fresh auction proceedings.
5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of."
Order Date :- 15.7.2024 NLY
Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present writ petition seeking allotment letter and sale deed despite dismissal of earlier petition and order for fresh auction is maintainable.
Golden Food Products India
State Of UP
Ghaziabad Development Authority
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Prashant Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
