LexMEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus ASSOCIATION OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
--- [2009) 6 S.C.R. 663 ~· MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY A v. ASSOCIATION OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES & ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 2619 of 2009) APRIL 17, 2009 B \.. - [LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA AND B. SUDERSHAN + REDDY JJ.] Tender - Nature of rights of a bidder participating in tender process -Held: Bidder is not entitled as a matter of c 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 D 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 F 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 G would also not entitle it to get any relief in equity - Equity - Administrative law. Urban development - Change of land use - Disputed 663 H 664 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 6 S.C.R:- A 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. B 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 ~n additional land of 20,000 sq.mts. and 37,000 sq.mts. in the said Scheme for establishment of Engineering College and other Degree D 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 E 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 F 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 H requested the Authority to allot 37,000 sq.m. of land at Rs. -' MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTH. v. ASSOCIATION 665 .,._ OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES ). 500 per sq.m. offered by them in their tender and in clear A 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 B 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. c However, having accepted the offer of 37,000 sq.mts. of land, AMS raised an objection stating that injustice was d~ne by the Authority in fixing the reserved pric~ at Rs. 6
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.