IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NISAR AHMAD KAKRU AND THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.195 OF 2010 DATED:29.4.2010 Between: M/s. Lahari Ventures 6-3-904, Somajiguda, Hyderabad Rep. by its Managing Partner Ch. Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Ch. Venkateswara Rao … Petitioner And The District Collector, Karimnagar District and others … Respondents THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NISAR AHMAD KAKRU AND THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.195 OF 2010 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Shri Nisar Ahmad Kakru) Public auction for quarrying sand in respect of Chegyam, Ramnur and Undeda of Velgatoor Mandal, Karimnagar District, was conducted on 04.01.2010, which came to be settled in favour of one Shri G. Sanjeev for an amount of Rs.1,56,56,000/-. The said settlement has become subject matter of a few petitions. The petition on hand (W.P. No.195 of 2010) is filed by M/s. Lahari Ventures on the ground that on 30.12.2009 despite efforts it could not obtain the form because of non- availability of any person in the office of the respondents on account of bandh. Alongside a miscellaneous petition was filed which begot an ad interim direction dated 12.01.2010, favouring the petitioner. It reads; “Interim direction as prayed for, on condition that the petitioner deposits a demand draft drawn on a nationalized bank for an amount of Rs.2,38,00,000/- (Rupees two crores thirty eight lakhs only) in favour of 2nd respondent and deposits the same with the Registrar (Judicial) of this High Court by 16.01.2010. Failing such deposit, the interim direction shall stand dissolved without further reference to this Court.” Being satisfied with the interim direction, the petitioner sought permission to continue the offer till adjudication of a connected writ petition. A further opportunity was granted vide order dated 23.04.2010 requiring the petitioner to deposit the amount by 27.04.2010, but the amount was not deposited, yet, in the interest of justice, the petitioner was granted yet another opportunity vide order dated 28.04.2010. Despite the fact that time to deposit was enlarged at the request of the counsel for the petitioner but amazingly today he has expressed inability to deposit the amount. Admittedly, it is a case where petitioner has not participated in the auction, but regard being had to the fact that a higher amount was offered by it, the Court displayed indulgence to allow it to be a contender by depositing the amount which opportunity it has not availed of on which count as indicated above a statement is made at the bar by learned counsel for the respondent No.5. It goes without saying that only those who have deposited the bid money could claim a right of consideration subject to fulfilment of other conditions but the petitioner having admittedly failed to deposit the amount, his petition is rendered liable to dismissal. Situated thus, writ petition is dismissed along with miscellaneous petition. Interim direction is vacated. SANJAY KUMAR, J NISAR AHMAD KAKRU, CJ 29-4-2010 B. Narsinga Rao