| Headnote |
Tender - Nature of rights of a bidder participating in tender process -Held: Bidder is not entitled as a matter of right to insist the Authority inviting tenders to enter into further negotiations unless the terms and conditions of notice so provided for such negotiations.Tender - Decision making process - Judicial review in contractual matters - Scope of - Held: Court not to substitute its own opinion for the opinion of the authority deciding the matter - But at the same time, courts can certainly examine whether 'decision making process' was reasonable, rational, not arbitrary and violative of Article 14 - On facts, allotment E of land for educational purposes - Bidder made a bid at a rate less than the reserved price - Authority was not under any legal or constitutional obligation to entertain the bid - Plea that allotment of land for educational purpose at reasonable rate would subserve public interest, not tenable as public interest parameters were taken into consideration by Government itself in directing the Authority to make the lands to educational institutions at a concessional rate - Bidder had no legal or constitutional right to make any perpetual demands and dictate terms to the Authority to allot any particular land at the chosen rate - Conduct of the bidder would also not entitle it to get any relief in equity - Equity - Administrative law. Urban development - Change of land use - Disputed land in Master Plan was reseNed for 'Residential' purpose - Authority earlier relaxed the use and made it for 'educational' purpose - There is nothing unreasonable in changing the land use and eannarking it again for 'Residential' use - Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973. Respondent-Association of Management Studies was indulged in managing various educational institutions imparting education such as MBA, MCA, Engineering etc. On 12.5.2000, MDA allotted a plot of land measuring 20,000 sq.m. situated in Ganganagar C Residential Scheme @ Rs. 560 per sq m. to AMS for construction of building for educational purposes. The AMS requested to allot additional land of 20,000 sq.mts. and 37,000 sq.mts. in the said Scheme for establishment of Engineering College and other Degree Colleges. The MDA invited tenders for allotment of land measuring 20,000 sq.mts. and 37,000 sq.mts. located in the said residential scheme available to be utilized for educational use. The reserved price was fixed at Rs. 690 per sq.m. for 20,000 sq. mts. and for the remaining extent of 37,000 sq.m. of land at Rs. 500 per sq. m. both being 50% of sector rate. The reserved price was fixed in terms of G.O. dated 19.04.1996 which provided that plots for educational institutions/engineering colleges should be sold at 50% of the sector rate. In response to the advertisement, AMS submitted its tender@ Rs. 500 per sq.m. for the plot of 37,000 sq.mts. and Rs. 560 per sq.m. for 20,000 sq.mts. The MDA informed AMS on 3.09.2001 that the offer @ Rs. 560 per G sq.m was less than the reserved rate of Rs. 690 per sq.m. in respect of 20,000 sq.mts. of land.AMS was put on notice to give its consent within one week if it was desirous of getting 20,000 sq.m. of land at Rs. 690 per sq.m. AMS in response to the said letter requested the Authority to allot 37,000 sq.m. of land at Rs. 500 per sq.m. offered by them in their tender and in clear terms stated that the other land of 20,000 sq.m. may be deleted from offer as the cost of that land was not viable for them. However, it stated that it was ready to purchase the same at Rs. 560/- per sq.m. as quoted by it which was the same rate at which the part of that land was already purchased. On 27 .11.2001, MDA informed AMS that only 37 ,000 + sq.mts. of land was allotted. This was accepted by AMS and they took allotment of only 37 ,000 sq.mts. of land. However, having accepted the offer of 37,000 sq.mts. of land, AMS raised an objection stating that injustice was done by the Authority in fixing the reserved price at Rs. 690 per sq.m. even though adjoining plots were allotted at Rs. 500-560 per sq.m. MDA in its meeting held on 15.03.2002 decided that the disposal of the land would be made through open Tender-cum-Auction for residential use after giving wide publicity. The Authority considered the offer made on behalf of a Housing Society to purchase the bulk of land measuring 20,000 sq.mts at Rs. 775 per sq.m. and as well as the letter dated 4.3.2002 sent by AMS. AMS by its letter dated 27.03.2002, requested the Authority to allot the said land at Rs. 690 per sq.m. or in alternative, the topography,of the land be so adjusted that both the 20,000 sq.mts. of land and 37,000 sq.mts. of land already allotted to the society may be made contiguous to each other so that the entire land could be fruitfully utilized by it for educational purposes. On 15.4.2002, MDA got issued fresh advertisement G J. inviting applications in newspapers for allotment of the aforementioned plot of land of 20,000 sq.mts. inviting bids from Foreign Direct Investors, building developers etc. for housing purposes with the reserved price of Rs. 885 per sq.m. and earnest money of Rs. 5.50 lakhs.Aggrieved, AMS filed writ petition in the High Court. The High Court by its interim order dated 7.05.2002, permitted the MDA to allot the land in pursuance of the advertisement dated 15.04.2002, but subject to the decision of the writ petition. In the auction held, the highest bid of Rs. 1365 per sq.m. was accepted. The highest bidder deposited the earnest money of Rs. 5.50 lakhs. The balance consideration was required to be paid in instalments. But during the pendency of the writ petition, the MDA by its order dated 14.5.2007 cancelled the auction and the decision of allotment to the auction purchaser. Auction purchaser filed the writ petition challenging the order of cancellation. The High Court allowed the writ petition filed by AMS and dismissed the writ petition filed by auction purchaser. Hence these appeals. The questions which arose for consideration in these appeals were what was the nature of rights of a bidder participating in the tender process; the scope of judicial review in contractual matters; whether the decision of the Authority dated 15.03.2002 undoing its earlier decision dated 7.7.2001 and changing land use of the disputed plot from educational to housing was unreasonable and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution; whether the decision was not in public interest; whether AMS was entitled to equitable relief and whether the High Court was justified in cancelling the auction in which the highest bidder deposited the earnest money of Rs. 5.50 lakhs. Allowing the appeal of MDA and dismissing the appeal filed by the auction purchaser, the Court |
