This single judge order dismissed a writ petition filed by a hotel seeking a directed mandate to award a university campus canteen tender to the highest bidder. The court found the petition lacked merit as no material on record showed any violation of the petitioner's rights.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Serial No. 132 Supplementary-1 List
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) No. 2456/2021 CM No. 7826/2021 Caveat No. 1811/2021
M/S Shabnum Hotel & Restaurant
… Petitioner(s)
Through: -
Mr Lone Altaf, Advocate.
V/s
Dean Students Welfare, SKUAST & Ors.
… Respondent(s)
Through: -
Mr M. Y. Bhat, Senior Advocate with Mr Furqan Yaqoob Sofi, Advocate.
CORAM:
Hon’ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
(ORDER)
01.12.2021
Through the medium of the instant Petition, the Petitioner has
sought the indulgence of this Court in granting it the following relief(s):
“That a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus may be issued by this Hon’ble Court by summoning the entire record of Tender Notice dated 23/09/2021 issued by the respondents and after perusal of the same this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to conclude the same by issuance of the allotment order against the highest bidder.”
Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, coupled with a
perusal of the pleadings on record, what emerges is that there is no material
on the record of the file which would demonstrate any action having been
taken by the Respondents with reference to violation of any right of the
Petitioner, thereby warranting it to approach this Court for seeking a ‘Writ of Mandamus’ under Article 226 of the Constitution. Seemingly, the Petitioner has filed the present Petition on some apprehension qua allotment of tender for running the University Campus Canteen(s) in favour of Respondent No.3, when, as a matter of fact, no final decision has been as yet taken by the Respondent-SKUAST with regard to the allotment of the aforesaid tender.
‘Mandamus’ literally means a command. The essence of ‘Mandamus’ is that it is a command issued for directing performance of a public legal duty. A ‘Writ of Mandamus’ is issued in favour of a person who establishes a legal right in himself. A ‘Writ of Mandamus’ is issued against a person who has a legal duty to perform, but has failed and/ or neglected to do so. Such a legal duty emanates from either in discharge of a public duty or by operation of law. The ‘Writ of Mandamus’ is of a most extensive remedial nature. The object of mandamus is to prevent disorder from a failure of justice and is required to be granted in all cases where law has established no specific remedy and whether justice, despite demanded, has not been granted. It is, thus, clear that existence of a right is the foundation of the jurisdiction of a Court to issue a ‘Writ of Mandamus’ . In the case on hand, the Petitioner has not been able to show as to which of its right has been violated by the Respondents which can be directed to be enforced by way of issuing a ‘Mandamus’ from this Court. In this context, the irrefutable conclusion which can be drawn is that none of the rights of the Petitioner stands violated by the Respondents for which a ‘Writ of Mandamus’ can be issued in its favour.
Given the above position, this Petition, at this stage, is found to be devoid of any merit. It entails dismissal and is, accordingly, dismissed along with the connected CM. Caveat No. 1811/2021 shall stand discharged accordingly.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge SRINAGAR December 1st , 2021 “TAHIR”
TAHIR MANZOOR BHAT 2021.12.02 14:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the Shimla University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology to award a canteen tender to the highest bidder.
Whether the petitioner has established a legal right violated by the respondents warranting judicial intervention.
Whether a final administration decision on the tender allotment has been taken or made final by the respondents.
M/S Shabnum Hotel & Restaurant
Dean Students Welfare, SKUAST
Ali Mohammad Magrey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
