IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2010 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9855 of 2010(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. BINU MATHEW, AGED 27, S/O.MATHEW SEBASTIAN, KANIYAMPARAMBIL, KATTAPPANA, KATTAPPANA VILLAGE, UDUMPANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. MATHEW, AGED 38, S/O.CHACKO, MANAKKAPARAMBIL, KUNTHALAMPARA KARA, KATTAPPANA VILLAGE, UDUMPANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. ALICE ULAHANNAN, W/O.ULAHANNAN, KAITHAKULATH, NARIYAMPARA, KATTAPPANA VILLAGE, UDUMPANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY SRI.ADEEP ANWAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LOCAL SELF GOVT.SECRETARIAT TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE KATTAPPANA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PANCHAYAT OFFICE, KATTAPPANA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE PRESIDENT, KATTAPPANA GRAMA PANCHAYAT COMMITTEE, PANCHAYAT OFFICE, KATTAPPANA. BY GP K.R.DEEPA SC SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).9855/2010 -------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT By Ext.P1 notice, the respondent Panchayat scheduled auction of its markets, comfort station, meat stalls etc, and the auction was to take place on 16.3.2010. Petitioners submitted the earnest money deposits in order to participate in the auction. According to them, the auction was adjourned to 23.3.2010 and again to 30.3.2010. Petitioners submit that in terms of the conditions of Ext.P1 auction notice, earnest money deposits ought to have been refunded on the next working day itself. It is complained that the Panchayat did not refund the deposits and therefore the writ petition is filed. 2. I heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Panchayt. 3. As far as the deposit made by the 3rd petitioner covered by Exts.P6 and P7 receipts, is concerned, Panchayat accepts that W.P.(C).9855/10 2 the stall, in respect of which the deposits made, has already been auctioned and therefore the Panchayat is agreeable to refund the deposit made by the 3rd petitioner. 4. Insofar as petitioners 1 and 2 are concerned, although it is the case of the Panchayt that the auction had to be postponed on account of their non co-operation after making the Earnest Money deposits, having regard to the conditions of auction as reflected in Ext.P1 notice, I feel that this Court would be justified in directing the Panchayat to refund the deposits made by petitioners 1 and 2. Therefore, the earnest money deposits made by petitioners 1 and 2 shall be refunded to them. 5. However learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are desirous of participating in auction as and when it is held and requests that the amount already deposited by them may be treated as the earnest money deposit in order to enable the petitioners to participate in the auction to be held. This request appears to be a reasonable one and therefore, there W.P.(C).9855/10 3 will be a direction to the respondent Panchayat to treat the amount available with it as the Earnest Money Deposit made by petitioners 1 and 2 for the auction as and when it is held. If the amount deposited is found to be inadequate, it will be the responsibility of the petitioners to make up the shortage if any. 6. Insofar as the 3rd petitioner is concerned, it is clarified that if he is desirous of utilizing the amount which is to be refunded, towards the EMD against the future auction, it will be open to him to make an appropriate request to the Panchayat in which event that request will also be considered by the Panchayat. Otherwise the amount will be refunded to him Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs