IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 11058 of 2008 Between: B. Satya Narayana, S/o. Late Ramaiah, R/o. 58-15-124/6, Sri Sai Residency, Shantinagar, NAD Post, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Mines and Geology Department, Rep. by Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Srikakulam-1, Srikakulam District. 2 The Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, MVP Dakula Road, Visakhapatnam. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the action of the Respondents in not confirming the auction held n 24-10-2007 nor refunding the earnest money deposit as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the Respondents to take decision either confirming the bid or refunding the earnest money deposit, deposited by the Petitioner with interest @ 18% forthwith, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.G.JHANSI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 11058 of 2007 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not confirming the auction held on 24-10-2007 nor refunding the earnest money deposit as arbitrary and illegal. The specific case of the petitioner that he participated in the auction held on 24-10-2007 has not been disputed by the respondents. However, the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, on instructions, stated that since single tender was received, the process could not finalized in public interest. Though I am not inclined to express any opinion as to the legality of the action of the respondents in not finalizing the tender, I find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents are not justified in not refunding the earnest money deposit. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to refund the earnest money deposit deposited by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 19-06-2008 Note: Issue C.C. in 3 days. B/o KLP