Summary
A bidder challenged cancellation of an unconfirmed government-property auction and a subsequent sale process. The Court found a rational public-interest reason in the contemporaneous record: the bidder’s auction offer was below its own earlier offer, and fresh reserve prices rested on independent valuations. It upheld the process and bound the later successful bidder to its enhanced offer, subject to the specified interest adjustment.
Issues
- Whether cancellation and re-auction were arbitrary despite the first bidder exceeding the reserve price.
- Whether absence of reasons in the cancellation letter invalidated the decision on this record.
Held
- The record explained why the initial auction was held in abeyance: its sole bid was materially lower than the same bidder’s prior offer. Seeking the best price for public property and obtaining reputable valuations supplied a non-arbitrary basis for a fresh auction. The appellant declined repeated opportunities to participate. (¶¶ 13, 14, 15)
- Judicial review respects an auction conducted bona fide and in public interest. Governmental decisions ordinarily require reasons; the Court considered the reports and interdepartmental communication disclosing the rationale and found no arbitrariness in this process. (¶¶ 16, 17, 18, 19, 20)
- The Court reiterated that larger public interest does not create a blanket exception to the rule against supplementing reasons. The cited authority allowed consideration of subsequent factual material in the specified public-interest setting. (¶¶ 18, 19)
Result
The appeal was dismissed. The successful later bidder was held to its Rs.35 crore offer, payable to the Union treasury within twelve weeks with the directed adjustment for interest at nine per cent on Rs.7.78 crore held by the Union, calculated from deposit until the judgment date.