1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN W.P.(MD)No.13800 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 M.Selvam ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District. 2.The Block Development Officer, (Village Panchayat), Office of the Block Development Officer, Batlagundu, Dindigul District. 3.The President, Town Panchayat, Old Batlagundu, Dindigul District. ... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent authorities to grant fishing right in Vedankulam and Periyakulam (Periyakanmoi), Old Batlagundu, Nilakkottai Taluk, Dindigul District on the highest offer made by the petitioner as early as 27.01.2011 with the 3rd respondent as per the conditions in para 2 of auction notice dated 15.02.2011 issued by the 3rd respondent, within a reasonable time. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Appadurai For Respondent No.1 : Mr.R.Karthikeyan, AGP for R1 For Respondents : Mr.S.Kumar, AGP for R2 and 3 O R D E R The petitioner has come up with the above Writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the respondents to grant fishing rights, in pursuance of the auction conducted on 21.02.2011. 2.Heard Mr.K.Appadurai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3.The licence to catch fish in Vedankulam and Periyakulam Kanmoi of Batlagundu, Nilakkottai Taluk, was put up to auction on 03.02.2011. The petitioner gave the highest offer. But the auction was cancelled and a second notification was issued on 15.02.2011. Even in the second auction held on 21.02.2011, the petitioner was the highest bidder. But the auction was not confirmed. Therefore, the petitioner has come with the above Writ petition. 4.On 02.12.2011 when the Writ petition came up for admission, Mr.R.Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader took notice for the respondents and I directed him to get instructions as to why the auction was not confirmed. 5.Today the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted on instructions that the Public Works Department objected to the auction being conducted without their concurrence and that therefore, the auction has been cancelled. 6.The fact remains that the highest bid offered by the petitioner was not confirmed so far. Before confirmation, no right vests on the highest bidder. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioner cannot be granted. 7.However, it is more than 11 months since the petitioner deposited Rs.2,50,000/- with the respondents. The respondent should have at least refunded the money so far. They have not done so. 8.Therefore, the Writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to refund the amount of Rs.2,50,000/- deposited by the petitioner, together with interest at 7.5% per annum from 25.01.2011, up to the date of payment. The amount shall be paid within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.is closed. 9.As and when the 3rd respondent conducts a fresh auction, it is open to the petitioner to participate. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(T&P) /True Copy/ Sub-Assitant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 To 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District. 2.The Block Development Officer, (Village Panchayat), Office of the Block Development Officer, Batlagundu, Dindigul District. 3.The President, Town Panchayat, Old Batlagundu, Dindigul District. +One Cc to The Spl Govt. Pleader, SR.No.43948 nbj rl/5c – 26.12.2011 W.P.(MD)No.13800 of 2011 15.12.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/