IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 10TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 19TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 14326 of 2009(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.V.SITHILKUMAR VEEPATT HOUSE, KALADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVITHAMCORE DEVASWAM BOARD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE THIRUVITHAMCORE DEVASWAM BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER THIRUVITHAMCORE DEVASWAM BOARD, PARAVOOR GROUP, PARAVOOR. 4. THE SUB GROUP OFFICER MANJAPPRA, PUTHOOR PALLI SUB GROUP THIRUVITHAMCORE DEVASWAM BOARD 5. SREENIVASAN P.N., SAI SAMSKARIKASAMITHY KENDRAM, NEAR POLICE STATION, KALADY. ADV. SRI.K.N.VENUGOPALA PANICKER, SC, TDB FOR R1 TO 4 SRI.KRISHNAKUMAR MANGOT,AMICUS CURIAE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = == == = = = W.P.(C) NO. 14326 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2009. J U D G M E N T Raman, J. The matter relates to auctioning of Poorna Auditorium, situated at Kalady belonging to the Travancore Devaswom Board. According to the petitioner, no proper notice or publicity was given for conducting the auction and as a result, petitioner was denied an opportunity to participate in the auction for the rights to maintain and enter into rental arrangements of the said auditorium. According to him, the auction, in such circumstances, conducted is violative of principles of natural justice. 2. A report was called for from the Ombudsman and a report was filed. We have perused the report. The auditorium is used by the Sai Sankara Santhikendram of which the 5th respondent is the Director. It is engaged in conducting old age home, supplying of free food to hospitals etc. The Ombudsman reported that from the files produced by the third respondent Assistant Commissioner, it is seen that the auction was WP(C) 14326/2009 2 conducted after fixing the upset price at 10% above the previous year's auction amount, that sufficient notice was given, that three persons including the petitioner have participated in the auction, that though the petitioner deposited Rs.12,000/- as earnest money he is not seen to have bid any amount in the auction, that the auction started from Rs. 1,29,300/-, that the 5th respondent offered the highest amount of Rs.1,29,800/- and the auction was confirmed in his name. If that be so, no case is made out by the petitioner for cancelling the auction already conducted. In the circumstances, we find no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. P.R. RAMAN, (JUDGE) P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) KNC/-