The facts leading to the filing of this Constitutional petition are like this. The petitioner was the highest bidder of one Kanal plot situated in Okara at the rate of Rs.13,000 per Marla, in the auction held on 25-4-1995. The bid offered in the auction was subject to approval by the District Housing Committee, Okara, as per terms and conditions of the auction, as evidenced by the advertisement published in Nawa-i-Waqt (Annexure "A"). The District Housing Committee before according approval to the bid referred the matter to the Sub-Committee for verification of the market price.
The Additional Deputy Commissioner (General) being member of the Sub-Committee opined that the market price of the plot was much higher than the one offered by the petitioner and suggested re-auction of the plot in the public interest. The District Housing Committee accepted this recommendation and directed re-auction of the plot. Accordingly, the Secretary of the District Housing Committee informed the petitioner of the decision of the Committee vide letter dated 5-7- 1995 which reads as follows:-- "The District Housing Committee, Okara in its meeting held on 5-6--1995/27-6-1995 under the Chairmanship of Deputy Commissioner/Chairman, District Housing Committee, Qkara has disapproved your bid for Plot No. 13/Z-60 wide road, measuring 1 Kanal in Area Development Scheme, Okara being lesser one."
It is this order which has been impugned herein.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the highest bid of the petitioner could not be rejected and he became the owner of the land by offering the highest bid. He has further argued that the District Housing Committee could not reject the bid on the recommendation of the A.D. C.(G).
3. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard at length. The advertisement (Annexure "A") shows that the highest bid itself was subject to approval by the District Housing Committee. A Sub- Committee was appointed to find out whether the bid offered was commensurate with the market value. It was in this context that the A.D.C.(G) being member of the Sub-Committee recommended for non-acceptance: of the bid on the ground that the price offered by the petitioner was much below the market value of the property. The disapproval of the highest bid offered by the petitioner in these circumstances is just and proper. It is not denied by the learned counsel that the bid was subject to approval by the District Housing Committee. The Chairman and the Secretary of the District Housing Committee in the comments offered by them have stated as under:-- "No discrimination has been made in the instant case as no auction at this price or price lesser than quoted by the petitioner has been accepted by the District Housing Committee, Okara, in the said auction. In ape, future bid the petitioner has right to participate and will be allowed to do so subject to the terms and conditions notified."
It may be observed that merely by offering the highest bid, which itself was subject to approval by the Committee, the petitioner did not acquire a legal right to have the plot on the price offered by him in the bid. Accordingly for want of legal vested right this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution is not maintainable.
For what has been stated above, this petition is dismissed in limine.