5. Though the very maintainability of the writ petition has been opposed by learned counsel representing the Corporation by citing a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Municipal Council Gondia vs. Divi Works & Suppliers, HUF & Ors.2 , by stating that in commercial disputes the writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ought not to be entertained. However, a plain reading of the very judgment relied upon by the respondents-Corporation would show that in the facts of that case, there were serious disputed questions of fact as also absence of material on record to support the contentions of the respondent therein. It was, thus, that the said order came to be passed. In the facts of the present case, the record is quite to the contrary. Thus, we find that reliance upon the said judgment will be of no avail to the respondents-Corporation. Additionally, having regard to the judgment in the case of Tata Motors Ltd. (supra), which has been rendered by three judges of the Apex Court and taking into account various documents, specially the correspondence made by the authorities of the Corporation with the petitioner, we have no hesitation to hold that this writ petition would be maintainable.
