TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 1427
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion Ltd., several properties, of which we are only concerned with two, were to be put to a public auction. The salient terms as contained in the auction Notice required the interested persons to deposit an amount of 2,00,000/- as Earnest Money; the successful bidder would have to deposit twenty five per cent of the auction amount at the conclusion of the bidding, and the remaining amount within thirty days of the approval of the bid by the Government. It is not disputed that the two Respondents/Writ Petitioners had deposited the Earnest Money together with twenty five per cent of the auction bids which, admittedly, were only marginally above the reserve price fixed by the Competent Authority. In respect of the Hide Flaying and Carcass Utili....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ector, Industries and Commerce. However, when the case was submitted to the Director, Industries and Commerce, he opined that a re-auction should be conducted as the two subject bids were only marginally higher than the reserve price. Indubitably, the Impugned Order mentions instances where bids were not accepted because they were only marginally higher than the reserve price; but failing to give due weightage and consideration to those instances where similar bids had in fact been accepted. 4 There can be no gainsaying that every decision of an administrative or executive nature must be a composite and self sustaining one, in that it should contain all the reasons which prevailed on the official taking the decision to arrive at his conc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 18.6.2004 of the Director, Industries and Commerce since there is an endeavour by the Appellant to add grounds and reasons thereto. It reads as follows: "Above office note may kindly be perused. In my opinion the highest bids offered are marginally higher than the reserved price and it would be appropriate not to confirm those bids and go for re-auction." This noting will palpably clarify that the element of cartelization or grouping was not one of the reasons for taking the decision to re-auction the two properties, which contention has been strenuously canvassed before us. 5 As we have already mentioned, the auction notice itself stated that it is the Government and not any other person, including the Managing Director of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Services Ltd. (2006) 11 SCC 548, Jagdish Mandal v. State of Orissa (2007) 14 SCC 517. 6 In the impugned Judgment, the High Court has rightly concluded that no sustainable justification and rationalization was recorded in writing at the relevant time for ordering the re-auction of only the two subject properties. However, we should not be understood to have opined that the Government is bound in every case to accept the highest bid above the reserve price. Needless to say, the presence of cartelization or "pooling" could be a reason for the cancellation of an auction process. In addition, a challenge on the ground that the property has fetched too low a bid when compared to the prevailing market price, would also be valid and permissible ....