JUDGMENT Heard Sri Sunil Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ram Prakash Singh who has accepted notice for the respondents. 2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties on 3.12.2015 the following order was passed : - "Heard Sri Sunil Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ravindra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent Nagar Palika Parishad, District Gonda. This dispute relates to the auction of a Taxi Stand in which the petitioner was admittedly a successful bidder for the year 2015-2016. Clause 6 of the advertisement specifies the date of installments that was to be observed. The petitioner paid the initial deposit but defaulted in making the second deposit on 01.07.2014 and deposited only half of the amount. The balance half was deposited later on. The third and fourth installments have not been deposited. The petitioner was put to notice about this default earlier and the petitioner had raised a dispute with regard to the shifting of the Taxi Stand whereupon the Nagar Palika Parishad passed an order on 12.08.2015 a copy whereof in Annexure No.12 to the writ petition. The petitioner thereafter again made a representation which was for making adjustments and for allowing more gestation period for the defaulted amount. The Nagar Palika Parishad has thereafter put the petitioner to notice that he being a defaulter, the provisions of Clause 6 of the advertisement would be invoked. The petitioner gave his reply but failed to comply with the conditions and consequently, the respondent Nagar Palika Parishad has proceeded to invoke the aforesaid Clause 6 and has cancelled the contract of the petitioner vide order dated 19.11.2015. It has simultaneously also proceeded with a fresh auction for the balance part. Learned counsel for the respondent Nagar Palika Parishad informs that one Mrs. Rabbul Nisha has participated along with two other bidders in the fresh auction after the termination of the contract of the petitioner and the said negotiations for giving it to the best bidder are going on today. In the aforesaid background, we had called upon the petitioner to instruct his counsel of his intention to comply with the terms and conditions of the contract on which Sri Sunil Kumar Sharma has informed the Court that the petitioner has agreed to deposit an amount of Rs. 26 lacs. by a bank draft by Tuesday next i.e. 08.12.2015. In the aforesaid background, we had called upon the petitioner to instruct his counsel of his intention to comply with the terms and conditions of the contract on which Sri Sunil Kumar Sharma has informed the Court that the petitioner has agreed to deposit an amount of Rs. 26 lacs. by a bank draft by Tuesday next i.e. 08.12.2015. He has further stated that the balance of the amount shall be deposited within the month of December itself. We find it appropriate, to adjourn this matter till Tuesday and we also make it known to the petitioner that the offer of balance amount will have to be deposited by 23.12.2015. In the event the petitioner intends to comply with the aforesaid conditions, we will pass appropriate orders in this regard on Tuesday. Till Tuesday any further contract or negotiations shall not be finalised in respect of the Taxi Stand in question. List on Tuesday i.e. 08.12.2015. Copy of the order today." 3. In compliance of the aforementioned order Sri Sharma has filed an application giving the details of the demand drafts which have been handed over to the learned counsel for the respondents against the liability of contract awarded to him. On receipt of the bank drafts the due proportionate amount of Rs.26 lacs is acknowledged by the learned counsel for the respondents subject to its encashment. 4. The balance amount of Rs.26 lacs which in terms of the order reproduced above was to be deposited by 23.12.2015 in the peculiar facts and circumstances of financial hardship faced by the petitioner, it is prayed that the said direction should be relaxed and modified to the extent that the petitioner may be permitted to deposit a sum of Rs.10 lacs on or before 23.12.2015 and the residual amount of Rs.16 lacs on or before 15.1.2016 so as to settle the outstanding liability between the parties. 5. The request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents subject to the fulfilment of the proposal that he has to deposit Rs.10 lacs on or before 23.12.2015 and remaining Rs.16 lacs on or before 15.1.2016. We order accordingly. 6. Let the directions of this order be complied with by the petitioner by making the necessary deposits as permitted above. 7. List/put up on 15.1.2016 for appropriate orders. We order accordingly. 6. Let the directions of this order be complied with by the petitioner by making the necessary deposits as permitted above. 7. List/put up on 15.1.2016 for appropriate orders. The interim direction issued earlier shall continue subject to the terms and conditions of this order. It is made clear that the petitioner shall be allowed to operate the contract forthwith.