Judgment :- K.A. Swami, CJ. 1. This appeal is preferred against the common order dated 3. 1995 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. Nos. 10227 and 10228 of 1992. The petitioner in W.P. 10228 of 1992 has come up in appeal. 2. The Collector of the District declined to accept the bid offered by the petitioner and accordingly, refused to confirm the auction sale conducted on 30th September, 1991 in exercising his powers under Rule 8 (2) (e)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concessions Rules, 1969 as it was in force at the relevant point of time. Learned single Judge has rejected the writ petition on the ground that the Collector has power to decline to accept the bid and refuse to confirm the auction sale, in view of the provisions contained in sub-rule 2(e) of Rule 8 of the Rules. 3. Before us, learned counsel appearing for the appellant laid great stress on clause (g) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 8 then existed. The said clause reads thus:- “(g) If any person offers within ten days from the date of auction to bid reauction at a price which shall not be less than two times the highest bid amount, the Collector shall direct the person concerned to deposit the amount offered by him within ten days from the date of receipt of the order of the Collector. On the deposit of such amount, the Collector shall reject all the bids and order a reauction with the upset price of the amount offered for the privilege of quarrying”. It may be pointed out that clause (g) is only a proviso to clause (e). Therefore, it does not take away the power of the Collector to refuse to accept the bid and confirm the auction if he is of the opinion that in the interest of the revenue, the auction should not be confirmed. It is this, that has been done by the Collector. Therefore, it does not take away the power of the Collector to refuse to accept the bid and confirm the auction if he is of the opinion that in the interest of the revenue, the auction should not be confirmed. It is this, that has been done by the Collector. Therefore, it is not possible to accept the contention that the provisions contained in clause (g) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 8 left no option to the Collector to confirm or not to confirm and he was required to confirm as the price offered by the third party was not two times the highest bid amount clause (g) deals with a case where any person offers within 10 days from the date of auction to bid in reauction at a price which shall not be less than two times the highest bid amount, and deposits the same. In such an event, the Collector has no option but to cancel the bid and direct the re-auction. But, in other cases, his discretion to confirm or not to confirm as contained in clause (e) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 8 is not taken away. Hence, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. The appeal is, accordingly, rejected. The C.M.Ps. are also rejected.