FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.---These petitions are directed against order, dated 30-7-2004, passed in C.M. No, 1306 in W.P. No,3824 of 2004, C.M. No, 1308 of 2004 in W.P. No,4017/2004 and C.M.
No,1300 in W.P. No,4025/2004.
2. The Tehsil Municipal Administration, Jampur, Rajanpur, District Rajanpur and Karor Lal Essan, District Layyah, after invitation of bids through publication in the press, leased out the rights of collection of fee for the cattle-markets (Mandi Mouvishian) for the year 2004-2005 to the Bismillah Corporation, Irfan and Co. Muhammad Ayub and Muhammad Ramzan and Co., the private respondents on 28-6-2004, 26-6-2004 and 12-5-2004 in consideration of Rs,15 Rs,68,00,000 and Rs,100,16,000 respectively. The petitioners claiming to be the intending bidders lodged complaints with the higher authorities of the commission of serious irregularities, favoritism and nepotism by the Tehsil Municipal Administration in respect of award of the contract of lease of all these places.
Thereafter, they filed aforesaid writ petitions calling in question the validity of auction proceedings on various grounds. The petitioners also made offer of Rs,20 million for Jampur, Rs,900,000 for Rajanpur and Rs,105,10,000 for Karor Lal Essan as lease money for the cattle-markets. The High Court passed ad interim restraint orders on 20-7-2004 and 23-7-2004 and directed the Tehsil Municipal Administration to collect the fee through its officials.
3. The private fespondents, to whom the contracts had been awarded, moved the applications C.Ms. Nos. 1306, 1308 and 1300 of 2004 for vacation of stay orders, dated 20-7-2004 and 23-7-2004 by the High Court. The same were allowed by the impugned order, dated 30-7-2004. Hence these petitions for leave to appeal.
4. Both the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that pursuant to invitation of the bids through press, the petitioners got prepared pay orders to make the requisite call deposits and presented the same to the Municipal Administration of the Tehsils, on the day fixed for holding the auction. The same were, however, returned to them on the pretext that the auction had been put off and a fresh date would be notified later. The petitioners came to know through the press that as a matter of fact the lease rights had been awarded to the private respondents by acts of favortism without actual holding of any open auction in a transparent manner. The so-called auction proceedings were fake in nature which lacked fairness and transparency.
' 4-A. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents in all these cases argued that the petitioners were awarded the lease rights for collection of fee for the cattle-markets as a consequence of a public auction held by the Municipal Administration of Jampur and Rajanpur and Lal Essan Karor, District Layyah, in accordance with law. It was further contended that mere making of higher offer by the petitioners subsequently would lead to unhealthy competition which practice might not be approved by the superior Courts. It was lastly submitted that the High Court had decided only the question of interim relief to the petitioners while the main writ petitions were still pending adjudication.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have perused the available record. We are not expected to hold a roving inquiry whether or not the petitioners had in fact gone to the Tehsil Municipal Administration for the purpose of participating in the auction proceedings or that they actually intended to make higher offer at that time. However, the respondents had not been able to place on record any material showing transparency or fairness in the auction proceedings so as to ensure the participation of all the intending bidders. It seems that the auction was held at all the three places in a surreptitious and restricted manner. The auction was required to be conducted by the Municipal Administration in a just, fair and transparent manner so as to ensure that the lease for collection of fee for cattle-markets would fetch the maximum public revenue. The petitioners repeated before us their offers of higher bid which they had made before the High Court without dilating upon the matter further and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the proper course would be re-auction of the lease by the Tehsil Municipal Administration in an open, just and transparent manner in order to safeguard the public interest and exchequer. Reference may be made to the cases of Muhammad Afzal v. Shahzad Asghar Dar and others 2003 SCM R 280 and Iqtidar Ali Khan v. Department of Mines and Minerals through Assistant Director, Attock and others decided by this Court on 14-7-2004 in Civil Petition No,116 of 2003. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the High Court thereby vacating the injunctive order was not legally justified.
6. For the foregoing reasons, these petitions are converted into appeals and the same are allowed.
Resultantly, the impugned order, dated 30-7-2004, passed by the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, is set aside. The Tehsil Municipal Administration of Jampur and Rajanpur, District Rajanpur and Lal Essan Karor, District Layyah, are directed to re-auction the lease of rights for collection of fee for the cattle-markets in question, within a period of three weeks, in accordance with law and in a just, fair and transparent manner. The Secretary, Local Government, Government of the Punjab, Civil Secretariat, Lahore, is also directed to ensure that the re-auction is conducted in a just, fair and an open manner. Meanwhile the present arrangement of lease to the private respondents shall continue. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.