JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J.(Oral): The respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 issued an advertisement comprised in Annexure P-2 for eliciting applications from the candidates falling in the handicapped quota for theirs participating in an auction qua shop/stall No. 99 scheduled to be conducted on 23/08/2013 at 3 p.m in the office of the Municipal Council. The petitioner as apparent from a perusal of Annexure P-5 belongs to the handicapped quota. He alongwith Smt. Dev Sarni participated in the auction/bid conducted on 23/08/2013 in the office of the Municipal Council, Rampur Bushahr. A perusal of the record placed before this Court divulges that the petitioner was the highest bidder. However, the respondents though were enjoined, by Clause 8 of the Leasing out of Stalls/Shops constructed by the Municipalities in Himachal Pradesh Rules, 2001, which stands extracted hereinafter, to after the acceptance of the highest bid offered in the auction conducted for allotment of shop/stall No. 99 located in Rampur Bushahr by the statutorily competent executive officer of the Municipal Council, Rampur Bushahr, to confirm it by an appropriate resolution being passed by the Municipal Council, Rampur Bushahr. “Conduction of Auction:-8 The auction shall be conducted by the Executive Officer or the Secretary of Municipality and the same will be confirmed by the Municipal or Nagar Panchayat through a proper resolution.? However, the respondents despite the auction having been conducted by the Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Rampur Bushahr, the statutorily empowered authority to hold/conduct it, wherein though the petitioner being the highest bidder, omitted to obtain its confirmation by an appropriate resolution having been passed by the Municipal Council concerned. Rather the respondents through Annexure P-4 have proceeded to cancel the bid on the ground meted out therein of only two participants/aspirants from the handicapped quota having participated in the auction for allotment of Shop/Stall No. 99. Rather the respondents through Annexure P-4 have proceeded to cancel the bid on the ground meted out therein of only two participants/aspirants from the handicapped quota having participated in the auction for allotment of Shop/Stall No. 99. The aforesaid ground as meted out by the respondents to not proceed to confirm the highest bid offered by the petitioner herein in an auction conducted by the Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Rampur Bushahr, rather proceeding to cancel his bid on the score of their being only two participants in the auction aforesaid per se appears to be nebulous, pretextual as well as flimsy, especially in the face of the advertisement notice issued for eliciting participation of aspirants from the handicapped quota having come to be given wide publicity as imminent from its having stood published in a news paper widely disseminated besides circulated in the area where Shop/Stall No. 99 is located. Even if two aspirants had participated in the bid in compliance to a wide publicity besides circulation in the manner aforesaid having been given to the advertisement notice does obviously for reiteration constrain a formidable inference that it hence was not a tenable ground to oust the petitioner herein to, seek its allotment in the manner contemplated in the apposite rules extracted hereinabove, in his favour, from the Municipal Council, Rampur Bushahr. The meting out of a flimsy ground by the respondents in not accepting the highest bid of the petitioner herein per se tantamounts to its having acted in an arbitrary manner, more so when the petitioner by offering the highest bid qua the aforesaid stall/shop had a legitimate expectation for its allotment in his favour by the respondents. 2. The learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to place on record any material divulging the fact that the respondents were constrained to cancel the bid on the ground that the highest bid offered by the petitioner was lesser than ones offered by the allottees/bidders qua locations enjoying a compatible commercial value viz.a.viz the property put to auction by the respondents, which material in case placed on record would have rendered vindicable the impugned annexures. Even otherwise, though the learned counsel for the respondents contends with force before this Court that it is not open for this Court in the exercise of its writ jurisdiction to judicially review the order of cancellation of the bid constituted in Annexure P-4, yet the above contention would acquire vigor as well as strength only in the face of Annexure P-4 communicating a legally sound reason constituted in the fact that the highest bid offered by the petitioner herein was neither equivalent besides abysmally low viz.a.viz bids offered for compatible proximate commercial locations at a time contemporaneous to the holding of or conducting of auction qua Stall/shop No. 99 located in Rampur Bushahr. Rather the aforesaid lack of a communication in Annexure P-4 does give ground for this Court to while its exercising writ jurisdiction to judicially review the palpably legally insagacious besides the legally frail reasoning bespoken therein of the highest bid offered by the petitioner warranting cancellation merely on the score of two aspirants having participated in the auction conducted by an authorized officer of the respondent. Writ petition is accepted and the impugned Annexure P-4 of 26.10.2013 for cancelling the auction and allotment of shop/stall No. 99 and Annexure P-6 letter No.1940 of 19.12.2013 are quashed and set-aside. The respondents are directed to confirm the bid offered by the petitioner within three weeks from today. No costs.