JUDGMENT In regard to the award of a contract for the right to collect a parking fee at Nagar Panchayat Barahalganj, District Gorakhpur, the petitioner was one of the bidders. The bid submitted by the petitioner was the highest bid. When the proposal for the award of the contract was placed before the District Magistrate, he took the view that the tender should be cancelled and fresh bids should be invited for two reasons: 2. Firstly, inadequate publicity was made of the tender inquiry, as a result of which, competitive bids were not available; 3. Secondly, it has been stated that the bid which has been received, does not reflect a satisfactory increase over the bid which was accepted for the previous year of the contract. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that there was an increase of about 11 % over the amount payable for the previous year and hence it is satisfactory. Whether a bid should or should not be approved, is a matter for the Collector to decide having regard to the aspects of public interest, since this has revenue implications for the State. The reasons which have been furnished by the Collector in the communication which has been issued to the petitioner by the Additional Collector (Administration) on 7 April 2016, cannot be regarded as extraneous or arbitrary. The reasons have a bearing on the legitimate interests of the State revenues. Hence, we see no reason to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.