CWP No.3511 of 1990 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.3511 of 1990 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.09.2011 M/s Bagga Singh Mohinder Kumar, Shop No.B/122, Nehru Ground, NIT Faridabad through its Partner Shri Roshan Lal and others. ... Petitioners Versus The State of Haryana through Secretary, Agriculture Department, Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh and others. ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present: None for the petitioners. ***** 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? NO 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? NO 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? NO K. KANNAN, J. (Oral) 1. The case is of the year 1990 and there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. I am disposing of the writ petition on the basis of the records of the case. The petitioners sought for quashing an auction notice, which took place on 21.03.1990 for sale of plots vested in the Chief Administrator, Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board, Panchkula. The auction notice was issued subsequent to a policy statement issued by the Chief Administrator to all the Secretaries of the Boards on the manner of reservation of plots to the old licensees in new markets developed by the various Committees in Haryana. The policy statement was that 75% of old shop plots in the Mandis shall be reserved for open auction, 20% shall be CWP No.3511 of 1990 (O&M) [2] reserved for Growers and 5% for Harijans. The policy statement also gave details about a small modification of the reservation in the manner referred to above in case where the allotments were made to the first time, no concession was required to be shown. However, there was a reserve price on the basis of a formula approved by the Board for all open auctions. It was decided that in respect of all New Mandi to be developed in future, the number of shop plots to be provided, would be the double number of the shops existing in the Mandis. 2. All the petitioners claimed to be valid licensees in respect of various shops in the Mandi under the control of the Board. The impugned notice of calling for an auction followed an auction notice published in the Tribune on 16.03.1990. The contention in the petition was that the manner of reservation of the shop plots with various percentages of allocation in open auction to Harijans and Growers etc. were contrary to the direction of the Supreme Court relating to how the priorities have to be worked out in public auction. The order of the Supreme Court passed on 27.11.1986 contains directions when the Supreme Court was allowing for persons, who had a valid licence to be eligible to participate in the auction. The allotments were to be made by draw of lots from the reserved category of 45% resolved by the Board. I cannot take these directions of what are contained in the judgment of the Supreme Court as laying down any proposition of law for all times to come about percentage that would be reserved for licensees in the open market. Again, unless the reservation of plots was shown to be wholly arbitrary, there was hardly a scope for interfering in a policy decision of the Board. CWP No.3511 of 1990 (O&M) [3] 3. In any event, it is not possible to indefinitely hold back auctions of shop plots that were meant for providing improved facilities for consumers. The situation that existed in the year 1990 cannot survive now and with no assistance coming from any of the petitioners, to justify the claims as relevant even to the present day situation, I cannot find any reason for intervention in favour of the petitioners. 4. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. ( K. KANNAN ) SEPTEMBER 02, 2011 JUDGE Rajan