Disposed¶31

Thirupathi.M v. The District Forest Officer

Madras HC29 Jan 2026WP(MD)/4561/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Forfeiture of 1/3 auction/tender deposit; clause-vii tender condition; karuvela tree cutting and removal tender; Forest Range Officer R.S.Mangalam; District Forest Officer Ramanathapuram Division; Article 226 writ of certiorarified mandamus; refund Rs.1,38,167/-; balance 2/3 unpaid; notices 14.02.2022/06.05.2022/10.06.2022/18.08.2022; inspections 03.09.2022 and 06.12.2022; writ petition disposed of; petitioner entitled to future auction.

What did the court decide?

No quash of the forfeiture order and no refund ordered; writ petition disposed of with no costs, connected miscellaneous petition closed, and an observation that the petitioner is entitled to participate in future auctions. ¶31

Thirupathi.M Vs The District Forest Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the first respondent's forfeiture of the 1/3 auction deposit paid by the petitioner is sustainable, given clause-vii of the tender conditions and the petitioner's failure to pay the balance 2/3 amount or to communicate his grievance in time.

¶28

Court's answer

Clause-vii of the tender conditions stipulates that if the balance 2/3 amount is not paid within the specified time, the tender is cancelled and the 1/3 deposit is forfeited; since the petitioner neither deposited the balance 2/3 nor sent any communication regarding his grievance over the cutting and removal of the karuvela trees, he cannot complain about the forfeiture of the 1/3 amount deposited by him.

¶28

Key takeaways

The petitioner is entitled to participate in the future auction.obiter¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), single-member bench of Justice R. Vijayakumar, disposed of W.P.(MD)No.4561 of 2023 challenging the District Forest Officer, Ramanathapuram Division's order dated 05.01.2023 (Se.Mu.Aa.No. 4507/2021/K) forfeiting the petitioner's 1/3 auction deposit (refund of Rs.1,38,167/- sought) after he failed to pay the balance 2/3 of the tender amount for cutting and removing karuvela trees despite communications on 14.02.2022, 06.05.2022, 10.06.2022 and a final notice on 18.08.2022. Inspections on 03.09.2022 and 06.12.2022 rebutted his claims that PWD had removed the trees and that the kanmai was flooded. Relying on clause-vii of the tender conditions - non-payment of the balance 2/3 within the specified time results in cancellation of the tender and forfeiture of the 1/3 deposit - and noting the petitioner neither paid the balance nor communicated his grievance at the material time, the court held he could not complain of the forfeiture. Petition disposed of, no costs; petitioner entitled to participate in future auctions.

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶2

DATED: 29.01.2026

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.(MD)No.4561 of 2023 and W.M.P(MD)No.4272 of 2023

M.Thirupathi

...Petitioner

The District Forest Officer, Ramanathapuram Division, Ramanathapuram District.

¶10

The Forest Range Officer, R.S.Mangalam, Ramanathapuram District.

¶11

...Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 1^st respondent in his proceedings Se.Mu.Aa.No. 4507/2021/K dated 05.01.2023 and quash the same and direct the respondents to refund the amount of Rs.1,38,167/- to the petitioner.

¶13

For Petitioner : M/s.V.Panneer Selvam

¶14

For Respondents : M/s.D.Farjana Ghoushia

¶15

Special Government Pleader

¶16

¶17

1/5

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The present writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the order passed by the first respondent herein on 05.01.2023 wherein the payment made by the writ petitioner towards 1/3 of the auction amount has been forfeitured.

¶21

The petitioner has participated in the tender process conducted by the second respondent for cutting and removing of karuvela trees. As per the tender conditions, the petitioner has to deposit 1/3 amount within a period of 30 days. Accordingly, the petitioner has paid the said amount. The balance amount has to be paid within a period of 30 days. However, the petitioner has not chosen to pay the balance amount.

¶22

The respondents officials have issued a communication to the writ petitioner on 14.02.2022, 06.05.2022 and 10.06.2022 and final notice was issued to the writ petitioner on 18.08.2022 calling upon him to pay the balance 2/3 amount. However, the petitioner has not chosen to deposit the same.

¶23

The respondent officials have conducted an inspection on 03.09.2022 and found that the allegation of the writ petitioner that all the karuvela trees

¶24

2/5

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

were cut and removed by the Public Works Department officials is not correct and the area allotted for the writ petitioner has not been covered by the Public Works Department officials. Thereafter, the petitioner has chosen to send a communication on 05.09.2022 to contending that the entire kanmai is full of water and therefore, he is not able to cut and remove the karuvela trees.

¶27

On 06.12.2022, another inspection has been conducted by the respondent officials and the impugned order has been passed on 05.01.2023 forfeiting the 1/3 of the amount that was deposited by the writ petitioner. This order is put to challenge in the present writ petition.

¶28

A perusal of clause-vii of the tender conditions reveal that, in case if the balance 2/3 amount is not paid within the time specified, the tender would be cancelled and the 1/3 amount that was paid would get forfeited. In such circumstances, the petitioner having not chosen to either deposit the 2/3 amount or send any communication with regard to his grievance over the cutting and removing of the karuvela trees, he cannot complain about the forfeiture of the 1/3 of the amount deposited by him.

¶29

3/5

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

With the above said observations, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. It is needless to point out that the petitioner is entitled to participate in the future auction.

¶32

29.01.2026

¶33

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No RJR

¶34

¶35