Dismissed

Sumitra Patil v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Feb 2022WP/774/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenging circular-mandated re-auction of leased shop premises held by the Municipal Council. Court upheld the District Collector's direction as the auction breached mandatory circulars; petitioners dismissed but refund of deposits directed.

What did the court decide?

Petitions dismissed. Respondent No.4 directed to refund earnest money and security deposits to the petitioners if not already refunded.

Sumitra Patil Vs the State of Karnataka — Public Procurement and Tenders | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.406 OF 2022 (LB-RES)

¶6

C/W

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.21479 OF 2021 (LB-RES) WRIT PETITION NO.774 OF 2022 (LB-RES)

¶8

IN WRIT PETITION NO.406 OF 2022 (LB-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI DARSHAN NAYAK G S S/O GANJAM SHIVA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/O SURYA NILAYA NIMISHAMBA TEMPLE ROAD SRIRANGAPATNA MANDYA DISTRICT - 571438

¶11

... PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI.RAMESH K.R, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY

¶15

DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT

¶16

VIKAS SOUDHA

¶17

BENGALURU - 560001

¶18

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT

¶19

MANDYA - 571401

¶20

¶21

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DISTRICT URBAN DEVELOPMENT CELL OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA - 571401

¶22

THE CHIEF OFFICER TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL SRIRANGAPATNA

¶23

MANDYA DISTRICT

¶24

MANDYA - 571438

¶25

... RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI.NITHYANANDA.K.R-AGA FOR R1 TO R3 SRI. H.C.SHIVARAMU, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER/COMMUNICATION DTD 29.10.2021 ISSUED BY THE R-2 TO THE R-4 IN THE FORM OF LETTER VIDE ANNX-D, THE PETITIONER PREFERRING THIS W.P. INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO DIRECTING THE R-4 TO CONDUCT RETENDER WITH RESPECT TO THE SHOP PREMISES BEARING NO.12 SITUATED IN THE COMMERCIAL COMPLEX CONSTRUCTED UNDER 10TH FINANCE SCHEME, NEAR PRIVATE BUS STAND, SRIRANGAPATNA BELONG TO THE R-4.AND ETC.

¶28

IN WRIT PETITION NO.21479 OF 2021 (LB-RES)

¶29

BETWEEN:

¶30

SRI RAVI H N S/O LATE NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDENT OF HEBBUR TUMKUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 120.

¶31

... PETITIONER

¶32

(BY SRI. RAMESH K.R, ADVOCATE)

¶33

AND:

¶34

¶35

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA,

¶36

BENGALURU-560 001.

¶37

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT,

¶38

MANDYA-571 401.

¶39

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DISTRICT URBAN DEVELOPMENT CELL OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,

¶40

MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA-571401.

¶41

THE CHIEF OFFICER TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL SRIRANGAPATNA

¶42

MANDYA DISTRICT-571438

¶43

... RESPONDENTS

¶44

(BY SRI. NITHYANANDA K.R-AGA FOR R1 TO R3 SRI. H.C.SHIVARAMU, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶45

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED THE ORDER / COMMUNICATION DATED 29.10.2021 ISSUED BY THE R2 TO THE R4 IN THE FORM OF LETTER AT ANNEXURE-D, THE PETITIONER PREFERRING THIS WRIT PETITION INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO DIRECTING THE R4 TO CONDUCT RETENDER WITH RESPECT TO THE SHOP PREMISES BEARING NO.20 SITUATED IN THE COMMERCIAL COMPLEX CONSTRUCTED UNDER 10TH FINANCE SCHEME, NEAR PRIVATE BUS STAND, SRIRANGAPATNA BELONG TO THE R4 AND ETC.

¶46

IN WRIT PETITION NO.774 OF 2022 (LB-RES)

¶47

BETWEEN:

¶48

SUMITRA PATIL D/O DEVENDRA GOWDA PATIL

¶49

¶50

AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O GIRIDHARSHINI NAGAR HALANAHALLI LAYOUT MYSURU DISTRICT MYSURU -570026

¶51

... PETITIONER

¶52

(BY SRI.RAMESH K.R, ADVOCATE)

¶53

AND:

¶54

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY

¶55

DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT

¶56

VIKAS SOUDHA

¶57

BENGALURU-560 001

¶58

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT

¶59

MANDYA-571401

¶60

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR DISTRICT URBAN DEVELOPMENT CELL OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA-571401

¶61

THE CHIEF OFFICER

¶62

TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

¶63

SRIRANGAPATNA

¶64

MANDYA DISTRICT -571 438

¶65

... RESPONDENTS

¶66

(BY SRI. NITHYANANDA K.R-AGA FOR R1 TO R3 SRI. H.C.SHIVARAMU, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶67

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED THE ORDER/COMMUNICATION DTD 29.10.2021 ISSUED BY THE R-2 TO THE R-4 IN THE FORM OF LETTER BEARING NO. MUN(2) 138/17-18 VIDE ANNX-D, THE PETITIONER PREFERRING THIS WRIT PETITION INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO DIRECTING THE R-4 TO CONDUCT RETENDER WITH RESPECT TO THE SHOP

¶68

¶69

PREMISES BEARING NO.7 SITUATED IN THE COMMERCIAL COMPLEX CONSTRUCTED UNDER 10TH FINANCE SCHEME, NEAR PRIVATE BUS STAND, SRIRANGAPATNA BELONG TO THE R-4 AND ETC.

¶70

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶71

O R D E R

¶72

The petitioners are successful bidders in pursuance of auction notice dated 20.03.2021 issued by the respondent No.4 for allotment of shops on lease basis for a period of 12 years.

¶73

Respondent No.4-Municipal Council passed the resolution for allotment of shops in question in favour of petitioner and the same was sent to Deputy Commissioner concerned for approval. However, Deputy Commissioner noticing that the auction proceedings were conducted in violation of circular dated 19.07.2019 issued by the Directorate of Municipal Administration issued communication dated 29.10.2021, directing respondent No.4 to re-auction the shops in question. Hence, these petitions.

¶74

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

¶75

¶76

The respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner noticing that the auction proceeding conducted is in violation of circular dated 19.07.2019 has directed the respondent No.4 to re-auction shops in question. The petitioners were the higher bidders in the auction proceedings conducted in pursuance of the auction notice dated 20.03.2021 and since the auction proceeding was conducted in violation of circular issued by Directorate of Municipal Administration, the bids submitted by the petitioners have not been approved and the same cannot be faulted with. Hence, the impugned communication dated 29.10.2021 issued by the respondent No.2 cannot be interfered with. Accordingly, writ petitions stand dismissed.

¶77

Respondent No.4 is hereby directed to refund earnest money deposit to the petitioner if not already refunded and also EMD and Security deposit, if not already refunded.

¶78

Sd/JUDGE

¶79

Sumitra Patil v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumitra Patil v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. Nirmala Raghu Vs the Secretary/Chairman/President

K H Nagaraja Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Rahul Chandrashekar Bhat Vs the State of Karnataka by

Sri Darshan Nayak G S Vs the State of Karnataka

Manpho Convention Centre Vs the Commissioner Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

M/S Event-X Vs the Commissioner Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike