RAMAVATHU RAMBABU Vs. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD
LAWS(APH)-2003-1-67
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on January 09,2003

RAMAVATHU RAMBABU Appellant
VERSUS
ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Petitioner seeks writ of Mandamus declaring the action on the part of the respondents 2 and 3 in not refunding the E.M.D. amount of Rs.5,00,000/- with interest, as illegal and arbitrary.
(2.)Facts in brief are that the respondent - A. P. State Road Transport Corporation (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') issued a tender notification on 10.8.2002 for the allotment of shops on licence basis. The petitioner was one was the successful bidders and as per the terms of the tender notification, he paid an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- in the month of August, 2002. Thereafter, the corporation issued the order of licence dated 24.10.2002 and required the petitioner to enter into an agreement and pay the balance amount of E.M.D. i.e., about Rs.7,50,000/-within fifteen days from the receipt of the said order of licence. It is stated that the said order of licence was received by the petitioner on 18.11.2002 and he has to pay the balance amount within fifteen days from that date i.e., by 3.12.2002.
(3.)It is not in dispute that on 3.12.2002 some third party who was aggrieved with the very same tender notification, approached this court by way of filing a writ petition in W.P.No.24194/2002 and obtained interim stay. However, the said writ petition was eventually dismissed at the instance of the Corporation on 17.6.2003. As there are delay, the petitioner in the meanwhile noticing that doing the cool drinks business in the off-season is not lucrative, issued a notice dated 9.12.2002 to the Corporation seeking refund of the E.M.D. amount and as there was no response, he also gave reminder on 4.4.2003. After the dismissal of the above writ petition on 17.6.2003, the Corporation issued letter dated 19.6.2003 and asked the petitioner to take possession of the allotted stall. Now the grievance of the petitioner is that since he is no longer interested in doing the business after a long lapse of time, he is entitled for the refund of the E.M.D.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.