THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 24270 of 2010 Oral order: The petitioner is Atchampet Mandal All Castes Sand and Boat Workers Labour Contract Co-operative Society Limited (hereinafter referred to as “Boatsmen Society”). The petitioner states that pursuant to the auction notice dated 12.07.2010, issued by respondent No.2, namely the District Collector, Guntur, they stood as the highest bidder in the auction conducted on 30.07.2010, in respect of Reach No. 9, for a period of two years. The annual lease amount is Rs.20,03,45,678.99 ps. The 1st year lease period ends on 31.03.2001, while the 2nd year lease period commences on 01.04.2011 and ends on 31.03.2012. According to the petitioner, as per condition No.3 of the auction notice dated 12.07.2010, which is incorporated in tune with Rule 9-C(1) of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’), as amended vide G.O. Ms. No. 84, Industries and Commerce Department, dated 10.04.2010, registered Boatsmen Co-operative Societies, are entitled to the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered. The petitioner states that since they are a registered Boatsmen Society and they being the highest bidder in the auction, are entitled to the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered by them, as provided under Rule 9-C(1) of the Rules, and it is their grievance that respondent No.2, has issued the confirmation orders dated 27.09.2010, without extending the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered by them. Hence, the petitioner filed this writ petition, to declare the action of respondent No.2 in not extending the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered by them as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct respondent No.2 to extend the benefit of 10% concession as provided under Rule 9-C(1) of the Rules. On behalf of the respondents, respondent No.5, namely the Assistant Director, Mines and Geology, Guntur, filed counter. The learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, reiterating the counter averments submitted that in the auction conducted by respondent No.2, five Boatsmen Societies participated, out of which three Boatsmen Societies, including the petitioner, are local Boatsmen Societies. Though the petitioner is the highest bidder, but they are not entitled to the benefit of 10% concession of the bid amount offered by them. He contended that Rule 9-C has been introduced in the Rules, to enable the local Boatsmen Societies participate in the auction-cum- tenders on par with other outside agencies or high profile individuals, but since the entire bidding, in the instant case, was done amongst the Boatsmen Societies, and no other outside agency or high profile individual participated in the auction, the petitioner, who stood as the highest bidder in the said auction, is not entitled to the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered. Therefore, no fault can be found with the action of respondent No.2, in issuing the impugned confirmation orders, by not extending the benefit of 10% concession to the petitioner on the bid amount offered by them. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology for the respondents. According to the petitioner, they being a registered Boatsmen Society, and having stood as highest bidder, in the auction conducted by respondent No.2 on 30.07.2010 in respect of Reach No. 9, as per Rule 9-C(1) of the Rules and Condition No. 3 of the auction notice dated 12.07.2010, which is incorporated in tune therewith, are entitled to the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered by them for the Reach in question. However, the respondents contend that Rule 9-C(1) of the Rules, has been introduced to enable the local Boatsmen Societies participated in the auction on par with other outside agencies or high profile individuals, and as the auction was conducted only amongst Boatsmen Societies and no outside agency or high profile individual participated in the auction, and the petitioner themselves being the highest bidder in the auction, are not entitled to the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered. Though the respondents have taken a stand that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered, the fact remains, a perusal of Rule 9-C(1) of the Rules, would make it clear that in the award of Reaches, preference will be given to registered Boatsmen Societies by allowing 10% concession on the highest bid/tenderd amount offered by them in the auction. To the very same effect, the respondents have incorporated a condition in Condition No.3 in the auction notice dated 12.07.2010, providing for the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered. Neither Rule 9-C(1) of the Rules nor Condition No.3 of the auction notice dated 12.07.2010, provides that the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered, will not be extended to the highest bidder, if the auction is conducted only amongst the Boatsmen Societies without the participation of any outside agency or high profile individual. That being so, merely because the petitioner stood as highest bidder in the auction conducted amongst the Boatsmen Societies, is no ground to deny the petitioner the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered. I n S.V.B.L.C. C-op. Society Ltd. v. District Panchayat Officer[1], this Court held that when the Rules stipulate conditions providing for concessions, they same cannot be denied on the ground that the society was financially sound and could compete with the participants and emerged as highest bidder. Though the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology submitted, realizing the defect in Rule 9-C(1) of the Rules, the Government, is taking steps to amend the same, the fact remains, he fairly admitted that as on today, Rule 9-C(1) of the Rules, has not been amended and it is still in existence as it is without any change. As long as Rule 9-C(1) exists in the Rules, without any amendment or change, so as to deny the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount, if the auction is conducted only amongst the registered Boatsmen Societies, I am of the considered opinion that the respondents are not entitled to deny the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered by the petitioner. Therefore, the action of respondent No.2, in refusing to extend the benefit of 10% concession to the petitioner on the highest bid amount offered by them, is illegal and arbitrary. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to extend the benefit of 10% concession on the highest bid amount offered by the petitioner, as provided in Rule 9-C of the Rules and Condition No.3 of the auction notice dated 12.07.2010. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since this Court did not grant any interim directions, and as the petitioner paid the 10% amount, subject to the result of the writ petition, and now that the writ petition has been allowed, respondent No.2 be directed to adjust the said amount as against the amount payable by him towards the third instalment. Accordingly, respondent No.2, is directed to adjust the 10% amount paid by the petitioner at the time of entering into agreement as against the third instalment payable by the petitioner. No costs. _________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Dated: 24th February, 2011 KSR [1] AIR 2003 AP 471