IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2008 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1929 W.P(C).No. 7227 of 2008(I) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- SALIM V.T., VAZHATHADATHIL POST PARALL, THALASSERRY. BY ADV. SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE KOTTAYAM DISTRICT PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/03/2008, ALONG WITH WPC NO.7596 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) Nos. 7227 & 7596 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 7th March, 2008 J U D G M E N T These writ petitions concern the auction that was held for running a milma booth and a canteen in the District Hospital premises, Kottayam. Petitioners submit that Ext. P1 in these cases are the auction notices in pursuance to which auction was held and according to the petitioners they were the successful bidders. Petitioners would state that in terms of the conditions of the auction they had remitted 1/3rd of the total amount. Despite all these, without any reason auction was cancelled and Ext. P5 re-auction notice in W.P.(C) No. 722708 and Ext. P7 in W.P.(C) No. 7596/08 were published scheduling auction to be held on 7.3.2008. It is in this background, challenging the re-auction notices, these writ petitions have been filed. 2. On instructions, the learned Govt. Pleader submits that last year also when right to conduct the milma booth and the canteen till W.P.(C) Nos. 7227 & 7596 OF 2008 - 2 - 31.3.2008 was sold in auction, wide publicity was not given by publishing the same in the newspapers. According to the learned Govt. Pleader, notice was published only in some of the local offices and this invited criticism by the audit party. It is also stated that despite all this, the same wrong procedure was repeated while publishing Ext.P1. On account of the lack of publicity that was given this year it was decided to cancel Ext.P1 and the consequent auction. It is stated that subsequently auction notices impugned in these cases were published in newspapers and auction is scheduled to take place today. 3. From the above submissions made by the learned Govt. Pleader, it can be seen that the object of cancellation of the auction in which the petitioners claim to be the highest bidders or the successful bidders, was only to give it wide publicity to attract better response. If as stated by the learned Govt. Pleader, in the previous year the audit party had criticized the method adopted by the respondents, they ought to have corrected themselves at the time when Ext. P1 was issued. When this was not done and when the lapses were noticed by the respondents, corrective action was taken W.P.(C) Nos. 7227 & 7596 OF 2008 - 3 - and that resulted in cancellation of the notices published and the auction held. Such action of the respondents cannot be faulted. That apart, the petitioners have no a case that any contract was signed by them. If that be so, they cannot contend for the position that any of their legal rights are injured in the process. At best their right is only to get the refund of the amount deposited. I cannot find any irregularity in the auction taken by the respondents. Writ petitions fail and are dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-