1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 12 TH DAY OF JUNE 2012 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J GUNJAL W.P.NO.16218 OF 2012 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN SRI.RAVI S/O THAMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT MUTTHATTHI VILLAGE HALAGURU HOBI MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI.S.K.JAYARAM, ADV.) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT. OF FOREST M.S.BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE – 560 001. 2. ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST KAVERI WILD LIFE DIVISION BEHIND MARADI GUDA NEAR KABINI COLONY APMC ROAD, KOLLEGALA CHAMARAJNAGAR DISTRICT 3. THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER WILD LIFE DIVISION KANAKAPURA RANGE RAMANAGARA DISTRICT 4. STATE OF KARNATAKA 2 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT. OF MUZARAYI M.S.BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE – 560 001. 5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT MANDYA. 6. THE THAHASILDAR MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT. 7. THE UPATHAHASILDAR NADAKACHERI HALAGURU HOBLI MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT. 8. SRI.MUTTHURAJU S/O DODDAKENCHEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT MUTTHATTHI VILLAGE HALAGURU HOBLI MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K.KRISHNA, AGA.) ***** THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A PRAYER TO QUASH THE TENDER CUM OPEN AUCTION NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT AS SERIAL NO.2 OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 8.3.2012 VIDE ANNEXURE-A. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: 3 O R D E R The petitioner was a successful bidder in the auction and he has deposited the requisite money on 21.3.2012. The tender notification was in respect of the parking place in and around the temple at Mutapti. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the second tender notification dated 27.3.2012, which according to him is in respect of a parking area in and around the temple. 3. Mr.K.Krishna, learned Additional Government Advocate on being notified submits that the area, which was notified under the auction dated 8.3.2012 and 27.3.2012 are altogether different and they did not over lap. Insofar as second notification is concerned, i.e., in respect of Muthathi Prakruti Shibira. Since, the two notifications are in respect of two different areas; I am of the view that the question of interfering with the action taken does not arise. Petition stands rejected . 4 Mr.K.Krishna, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents is permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks. SD/- JUDGE SS.