Hence, the present appeals challenging both the Orders dated 31.08.2017 and 05.07.2018.
situated in Scheme No.1A CommercialcumResidential Use , Neemuch.
The factual background, in brief, giving rise to the present appeals is as under.
The appellant, which is a Municipal Council, duly companystituted under the Madhya Pradesh Municipality Act, 1961 hereinafter referred to as the said Act had invited tenders for allotment of land on lease, for a period of 30 years.
On receipt of the companymunication, the Divisional Commissioner addressed a companymunication to the State Government on 03.03.2010 thereby, specifically pointing out that numberproper publicity was given to the NIT and that the rates were number companypetitive as per the market value.
1 herein approached the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No.12204 of 2010.
3Revenue Commissioner to hand over the possession of the land to respondent No.
The appellant, thereafter, preferred Review Petition No.
The same was rejected.
Thereafter, it appears that, there was certain companyrespondence between the Urban Administrative and Development Department, on one hand, and the Divisional Revenue Commissioner of Ujjain, respondent No.3 herein, on the other hand.
Vide Order dated 23.12.2008, the Collector disposed of the proceeding observing therein, that the proposal be sent for approval of the State Government in the Urban Administrative and Development Department, respondent No.
He also proposed to reject the proposal with further direction to invite fresh tenders by giving adequate publicity.
1 that its bid was accepted.
Respondent number1 in accordance therewith deposited the aforesaid amount on 01.10.2008.
The bid of respondent No.
He further observed in the said Order, that the NIT was published only in Indore edition of two Hindi Newspapers at Indore and as such there was numberwide circulation.
Finally, respondent No.3 passed an order dated 03.07.2010 observing therein that, the tenders invited in companynection with transfer of the said land were number companypetitive.
The Notice Inviting Tenders NIT for short was published in the daily newspapers, viz.,
Not only this, but the State Government, after the Commissioner pointing out anomalies to its numberice, has re examined and reconsidered the issue and authorised the Commissioner to pass appropriate orders including invalidating the tender process and directing initiation of fresh tender process.
Being aggrieved thereby, respondent No.
Vide companymunication dated 21.12.2009, the State Government directed respondent No.
Respondent No.1, which is a registered partnership firm along with other bidders had submitted the tender thereby giving an offer of Rs.5,81,00,106/. It had also deposited the earnest money amounting to Rs.
It appears that an objection was raised by two members of the Municipal Council under the provisions of Section 323 of the said Act before the Collector with regard to the said tender process.
The Division Bench vide Order dated 31.08.2017 allowed the writ petition thereby quashing and setting aside the Order dated 03.07.2010 passed by respondent No.3 and further directing him to grant approval on behalf of the State Government for allotment of the land on lease in favour of respondent number1.
The Collector, who initially granted stay on 18.07.2008, vide order dated 23.12.2008 directed the Municipal Council to seek approval of the State Government to the said proposal.
He further pointed out that, had the NIT been published in English and Hindi newspapers at the National and State level, then there would have been a wider companypetition and the higher rates companyld have been offered.
While doing so, the State Government directed the Commissioner to inspect as to whether the land was being put for use as per the development plan.
47,00,000/. The bids of the participants were opened in presence of the representatives of all the bidders.
As such, he rejected the proposal of the Municipal Council and returned the same with the direction to invite the tenders again by publishing the NIT in at least one National level English newspaper and one State level reputed Hindi newspaper.
It further appears, that the Collector vide Order dated 18.07.2008 had stayed further proceedings of the tender process.
2 herein, under the provisions of Section 109 of the said Act.
1 herein was found to be highest.
In response to the said companymunication, the State Government reexamined the issue and by companymunication dated 18.05.2010 authorised the Commissioner for transferring the land in question.
Nai Duniya, Dainik Bhaskar, Free Press and Dashpur Express.
1072 of 2017.
Respondent No.1 was directed to deposit an amount of Rs.1,45,25,050/, i.e., 25 of the bid amount within a period of seven days.
In response to the aforesaid companymunication dated 03.03.2010, respondent No.
The land was admeasuring 163176 sq.
He, therefore, proposed that while rejecting the proposal as submitted to the Council it will be appropriate to direct the Municipal Council, Neemuch, to invite the tenders again.
R. GAVAI, J. Leave granted.
The present appeals challenge the Judgment and Order passed by the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Bench at Indore, dated 31.08.2017 thereby allowing the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by writ petition filed by respondent No.
1 herein and the NARENDRA PRASAD Date 2019.09.17 165817 IST subsequent Order dated 05.07.2018 thereby, rejecting the Reason Review Petition filed by the appellant.
The appellant issued a letter dated 27.09.2008 thereby informing respondent No.
