THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.19405 of 2008 ORDER: Sri Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Swamy Vari Devasthanam, the 1st respondent (for short ‘the Devasthanam’) issued tender notice dated 16-08-2008, inviting tenders to grant licences to various establishments. Cool Drinks and Fancy Shop near Sub- canteen of the Devasthanam was one of the items. Petitioner submitted his tender. Tenders were received and auction was held on 25-08-2008. Petitioner oﬀered Rs.27,000/- per month and it was the highest bid. He claims to have made a deposit of Rs.4,90,000/-, and expressed his willingness to be granted the licence. On ﬁnding that the Devasthanam issued fresh notice dated 04-09-2008, inviting tenders and bids for that very shop, he approached this Court. He states that once he has emerged as the highest bidder, there is no justiﬁcation for the respondents in inviting bids for that shop. Respondent No.3 in the writ petition, ﬁled counter- affidavit. According to him, the Devasthanam found that the bid of the petitioner was very low, and in that view of the matter, proceeded to issue fresh tender notice. The deposit of Rs.4,90,000/- is said to be unauthorized and without any basis. It is stated that the shop is likely to fetch licence fee of Rs.50,000/- per month, and that he is prepared to pay Rs.45,000/- per month. Heard Sri B.P. Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the Devasthanam, and Sri S. Subba Reddy, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent. It is true that the petitioner emerged as the highest bidder for a sum of Rs.27,000/-, in the auction held on 25- 08-2008. Rights could have accrued to the petitioner, if only the Devasthanam accepted his bid, and required him to make deposit of the advance licence fee. Even when insisted by this Court, the petitioner is not able to place before this Court, any communication to him, from the Devasthanam, accepting his bid. Therefore, no rights can be said to have accrued to the petitioner, on account of his mere emerging as the highest bidder. According to the terms of the tender notice, the successful tenderer has to deposit the licence fee for the entire year, on his bid being accepted. It has already been pointed out that, there is no communication from the Devasthanam, accepting the bid of the petitioner. Even where the bid is accepted, the amount that could have been needed by the petitioner is, Rs.3,24,000/-. The petitioner made a deposit of Rs.4,90,000/-, through a demand draft dated 23-08-2008. That means, he was ready with the demand draft, much before the date of auction. Neither the amount, nor the date covered by the demand draft accord with the procedure. The Devasthanam has the full discretion, to go for fresh auction, till it secures satisfactory oﬀer. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ Dt.15-11-2008. L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. KO