A bidder withdrawing from an auction purchase is entitled to return of deposited amounts, subject to verification.

The two writ petitions involved common facts and questions of law and were therefore decided by a common order.

The petitioner had participated in an auction conducted on 15.03.2021 for the subject land and deposited demand drafts of ₹26,40,000 in WPC No. 5654 of 2022 and ₹11,32,031 in WPC No. 2027 of 2023.

He initially sought quashing of communications dated 21.09.2022 and 09.11.2022 and a direction to transfer the bhumiswami rights in the auctioned land to him.

Subsequently, the petitioner stated that he was no longer willing to purchase the land because conditions imposed by the authorities after the auction were unacceptable to him.

The State submitted that the order dated 09.11.2022 had already directed the petitioner to receive the deposited demand drafts and that there was no impediment to their return.

Whether the petitioner, having declined to proceed with the purchase pursuant to the auction dated 15.03.2021, was entitled to return of the amounts represented by the deposited demand drafts?

Whether the concerned authorities should be directed to release the demand drafts after verification and completion of the requisite formalities?

The Court applied the principle that where an auction participant elects not to proceed with the purchase and the deposited amount has not been finally appropriated or encashed, the amount may be returned, subject to verification of the records and compliance with necessary administrative formalities.

No specific statutory provision or judicial precedent was cited or relied upon in the order; the decision was based on the petitioner’s recorded withdrawal from the proposed purchase, the State’s concession regarding return of the demand drafts, and the equitable exercise of writ jurisdiction.

The petitioner expressly abandoned his earlier request for transfer of the bhumiswami rights and stated that he was unwilling to proceed with the auction purchase because of subsequently imposed conditions.

Since the State acknowledged that the petitioner had already been directed to receive the demand drafts and did not identify any legal impediment to their return, the Court found that retaining the deposited amounts was unjustified.

It therefore directed return of the respective demand drafts, subject to verification of the records and completion of the necessary formalities.

The petitioner was directed to submit an application for release within 10 days from receipt of the order.

Upon receiving the application, the authorities were directed, after verification and completion of formalities, to return the demand drafts along with certificates confirming that they had not been encashed, within 30 days.

Both writ petitions were disposed of accordingly.