ORDER B.V. Nagarathna, J. 1. Petitioner has sought a direction against respondents for refund of Rs. 2,00,600/- which amount was paid towards fencing of the land bearing Sy. No. 17 measuring 2 acres 34 guntas at Pattandur Village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk. A further direction is sought against respondents to pay interest at the rate of 24% p.a. on Rs. 9,03,75,600/- from the date of deposit till date of refund by considering the representation dated 19-7-2012 (Annexure-W). It is the case of petitioner that aforesaid land was notified for auction by notification dated 22-10-2007 inviting bids from members of the public. A copy of the notification is produced at Annexure-A. Petitioner made an initial deposit of Rs. 28,50,000/- in order to participate in the auction. His bid of Rs. 12,07,00,000/- being highest, was accepted by second respondent who declared him to be a successful bidder. The petitioner made various deposits in order to pay the auction amount on several dates. The deposits made by the petitioner which are indicated in his representation dated 19-7-2012 amounting to Rs. 9,01,75,000/- are as under: 2. In addition, a sum of Rs. 2,00,600/- was remitted on 31-3-2008 vide demand draft bearing No. 101100 drawn in favour of State Government for the purpose of fencing the land in question. Thereafter, petitioner sought confirmation of his bid and registration of the land in question in his name as well as handing over of possession of said land but there was no response on the part of respondents to the request made by the petitioner. Petitioner had also sought for joint survey of the land in question so that possession could be handed over to him at the time of registration of the said land in his name. As petitioner became aware that land in question would not be registered in his name and that confirmation of the auction would not take place on account of certain other private parties filing a suit against the State Government in O.S. No. 97 of 1995 which ultimately culminated in a decree of permanent injunction against the State Government and its authorities, petitioner sought for refund of the entire amount that he had deposited with respondent-authorities being successful bidder in the auction as well as the amount of Rs. 2,00,600/- which was paid towards fencing of the property along with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. on 30-6-2012. Petitioner received an amount of Rs. 9,01,75,000/- excluding the amount of Rs. 2,00,600/- which was utilised for the purpose of fencing the land in question. Therefore, petitioner made repeated requests for the refund of the entire amount deposited by him. In addition, by representation dated 19-7-2012 - Annexure-W petitioner sought interest on the amounts deposited by him namely, Rs. 9,03,75,600/- at the rate of 24% p.a. Grievance of the petitioner is that his repeated requests have fallen at deaf ears and therefore a direction is sought against respondents to consider his representation dated 19-7-2012. 3. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3 and perused the material on record. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would contend that as respondents were unable to register the land in question in the name of petitioner nor hand over possession of the same and in the absence of any other alternative land being made available to the petitioner, latter was entitled to refund of the entire amount deposited by him with interest from the date of deposit till realisation and that repeated requests made by the petitioner has not been heeded to by respondents. In support of his submission, he placed reliance on judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 984 of 2009, dated 12-10-2009. 5. Per contra, learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents would contend that respondents were right in not refunding an amount of Rs. 2,00,600/- which was paid by the petitioner, as the same was utilised for the purpose of fencing of the land in question. He also contends that as per the terms and conditions of auction notification, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-A, dated 22-10-2007, Clause 17 in particular, petitioner is not entitled to any interest. He therefore would contend that there is no merit in this writ petition. 6. Having heard learned Advocates appearing for both sides and on perusal of the material on record, it is noted that pursuant to notification dated 22-10-2007 auction was conducted in respect of the aforesaid land on 2-11-2007. Petitioner herein was declared to be a successful bidder. Admittedly, he has made payments in respect of bid amount which was Rs. 6. Having heard learned Advocates appearing for both sides and on perusal of the material on record, it is noted that pursuant to notification dated 22-10-2007 auction was conducted in respect of the aforesaid land on 2-11-2007. Petitioner herein was declared to be a successful bidder. Admittedly, he has made payments in respect of bid amount which was Rs. 12,07,00,000/- on various dates noted above totaling a sum of Rs. 9,01,75,000/-. In addition, a sum of Rs. 2,00,600/- has been paid to the State Government with regard to fencing of the land in question. Though respondents have accepted the bid amount by the petitioner as they had declared him to be the successful bidder, no further steps were taken for confirmation of the auction sale, the reason being that the land in question was subject-matter of litigation and ultimately culminated in judgment and decree dated 14-6-2008 in O.S. No. 97 of 1995. Therefore, the petitioner did not receive the benefit of the auction sale that was held by the State Government. Even then the amounts that was required to be deposited as per the auction notification dated 22-10-2007 were made by the petitioner. It is in that context that petitioner is seeking refund of the amount i.e., on account of the inaction on the part of respondents in complying with the terms and conditions of auction notification. The respondents have no doubt refunded an amount of Rs. 9,01,75,000/- but have not returned Rs. 2,00,600/-, the reason being that the latter amount was utilized for fencing the land in question. Petitioner not having received the benefit of auction, cannot now to be made liable for payment of Rs. 2,00,600/- which has been utilised for the fencing of land in question, particularly in the face of decree suffered by respondents in O.S. No. 97 of 1995. The petitioner is not responsible for this state of affairs. Therefore, State Government is directed to refund an amount of Rs. 2,00,600/- which has been deposited by the petitioner even though same may have been utilised for fencing the land in question. 7. The other relief sought for by the petitioner is with regard to payment of interest on Rs. 9,01,75,000/- deposited towards bid amount as well as Rs. 2,00,600/- paid for the purpose of fencing of the land in question. 2,00,600/- which has been deposited by the petitioner even though same may have been utilised for fencing the land in question. 7. The other relief sought for by the petitioner is with regard to payment of interest on Rs. 9,01,75,000/- deposited towards bid amount as well as Rs. 2,00,600/- paid for the purpose of fencing of the land in question. Learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents has contended that petitioner is not entitled to any interest on those amounts. However, learned Counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the judgment of Division Bench of this Court referred to above in which, under similar circumstances, the Division Bench had upheld the order of learned Single Judge who had granted interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of receipt till payment. In that case also there was an auction of land bearing Sy. No. 24 measuring 15 guntas in Kenchenahalli Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk. The successful bidder therein had deposited 25% of the amount within the stipulated period and balance 75% of the amount was also deposited. The total bid amount therein was Rs. 1.90 Crores. Auction could not be confirmed under the circumstances mentioned therein and successful bidder therein had sought for refund of the deposit. The amount of Rs. 1.90 Crores was refunded. But no interest was paid on that amount. Therefore, writ petition was filed before this Court seeking interest on the refunded amount. Learned Single Judge granted relief and Division Bench confirmed the order of learned Single Judge by holding that successful bidder was justified in seeking refund of the bid amount along with interest. That judgment squarely applies to the facts of present case as there is failure on the part of respondents-authorities in confirming the bid and registering the land in question in the name of the petitioner herein. In the circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on all the amounts deposited by him from the date of deposit" till refund. Respondents-authorities shall compute interest and pay the same on or before 31st May, 2014. In the result, writ petition is allowed in the following manner: (i) Respondents are directed to consider representation dated 19-7-2012 (Annexure-W) and pay amount of Rs. 2,00,600/- being the amount deposited by the petitioner towards fencing of the land in question on or before 31-5-2014. Respondents-authorities shall compute interest and pay the same on or before 31st May, 2014. In the result, writ petition is allowed in the following manner: (i) Respondents are directed to consider representation dated 19-7-2012 (Annexure-W) and pay amount of Rs. 2,00,600/- being the amount deposited by the petitioner towards fencing of the land in question on or before 31-5-2014. (ii) Respondents are also directed to compute interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of deposit till date of payment of Rs. 9,03,75,600/- and pay the same on or before 31-5-2014. (iii) Parties to bear their respective costs. Petition allowed.