IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11466 of 2009 BIJAY SHANKAR, SON OF LATE RAMSWARATH SAH, PROPRIETOR OF M/S R.S. STEEL, NEW CIVIL LINE, TURAH TOLI BUXER, P.S. TOWN, DISTRICT BUXER, BIHAR----PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER, HAJIPUR, VAISHALI. 2. THE CONTROLLER OF STORES, EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY BISCOMAUN BHAVAN, PATNA. 3. THE CHIEF MATERIAL MANAGER, EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY HAJIPUR, VAISHALI. 4. THE DEPUTY MATERIAL MANAGER, DEPOT, EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY, SAMASTIPUR---RESPONDENTS. For the Petitioner : Mrs. Mira Kumari, Advocate. For the Railways : Mr. Parashuram Singh, Advocate. ----------- 04. 13.10.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Railways. 2. Petitioner is the owner of a kabari shop at Samastipur. He had participated in the tender notice for auction of the railway materials, namely, 14 number of condemned coaches, for which auction notice dated 6.12.2007, Annexure-1 has been published. In compliance whereto he participated in the auction held on 29.12.2007 and succeeded in the auction being the highest bidder, which is evident from the authority letter dated 29.1.2008, Annexure-1/A. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in compliance of the authority letter he also deposited the earnest money of Rs.3,27,133/- by demand draft. In terms of the authority letter he had to deposit the balance sale value on 17.2.2008. It is further submitted that before depositing the balance sale value he made inspection of the auctioned railway property and found that out of 14 coaches auctioned only 12 were available at the site with electrical fittings and in terms of the railway policy condemned coaches with electrical fittings are not allowed to be removed. Appreciating the - 2 - aforesaid two facts petitioner submitted representation before the competent authority in terms of the authority letter dated 29.1.2008 but the competent authority did not consider the request of the petitioner to make available the 14 coaches after removing the electrical fittings. Later the advocate’s notice was served on the competent authority, namely, the Chief Material Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur, which was replied to by the Deputy Chief Material Manager(Depot), Samastipur under letter dated 15.11.2008, Annexure-6/1 whereunder the request of the petitioner to make available the 14 number of coaches after removing the electrical fittings was not considered by the Deputy Chief Material Manager. 4. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that as the entire auctioned property, namely 14 number of coaches were not made available at the site after removing the electrical fittings, the petitioner could not deposit the balance sale consideration. 5. The Deputy Chief Material Manager under the impugned order dated 3.9.2008, Annexure-5 has directed the petitioner to withdraw his earnest money, which availed before this Court. 6. Counsel for the railways, however, opposed the prayer of the petitioner as according to him petitioner having participated in the auction after having verified the condemned coaches available in the lot has submitted his bid, in the circumstances he cannot be allowed to say at this stage that the auctioned coaches are not available at the site. He, however, has not disputed the fact that the 12 number of coaches which were available at the site were with the electrical fittings. - 3 - 7. Having heard counsel for the parties, I dispose of this writ application with direction to the petitioner to approach the Chief Material Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur, Respondent No.3, who should consider his request to extend the time to deposit the balance sale consideration, provided he is satisfied about the contention of the petitioner that 12 number of coaches available at the site were fitted with electrical fittings and could not have been removed as also the fact that two number of coaches which were auctioned were not available for removal, if the submission of the petitioner is correct on both the counts, the Chief Material Manager may consider the request of the petitioner to extend the time to deposit the balance sale consideration. Necessary order in the light of this order be passed as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of receipt of the representation of the petitioner along with a copy of this order. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)