Syed Masur Vs the Assistant Director

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED 01.06.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-J PRODUCED IN THE WRIT PETITION; AND ETC.

¶27

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

¶28

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶32

In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the demand notice dated 01.06.2020 (Annexure-J) issued by respondent No.1, inter alia, sought for a direction to respondents to consider the representation at Annexures - G & H respectively.

¶33

3 -

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:43900 WP No. 8595 of 2020

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

It is submitted by Sri. R. Shashidhar, learned counsel, that the petitioner was awarded with the tender for fisheries as per the Government Order dated 21.02.2014 for a period of five years from 2019 till 2024. He further invited the attention of the Court to the photographs relating to the construction of bridge taken up by the respondent - authority and thereby submitted that, petitioner was not able to get the benefits of the tender and accordingly, challenged the notice(Annexure-J) dated 01.06.2020, and sought for a direction to the respondents to consider the representations made by the petitioner produced at Annexures - G and H to the writ petition.

¶37

In respect of the Annexures - G and H, it is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that those representations were given to stop the construction of the bridge work, however, since work was undertaken by the respondent - authorities for construction of roads, bridges and allied works including the tank, and therefore, sought for interference of this Court.

¶38

Learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the petition.

¶39

4 -

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC:43900 WP No. 8595 of 2020

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

In the light of the submissions made by the parties, it is

¶43

not in dispute that the petitioner was allotted with the tender work for fisheries for a period of five years from 2019 till 2024. Perusal of the writ papers would indicate that the construction of roads, bridge and allied work was undertaken by the fifth respondent near the tank which was leased in favour of the petitioner and therefore, I am of the view that, as the fishing tender was allotted to the petitioner based on the participation of the petitioner in the tender process, I am of the view that,

¶44

the matter is of contractual nature and therefore, no interference is called for under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in this writ petition. However, taking into consideration the documents / photographs produced and the alleged loss caused to the petitioner on account of the intermediary work taken by the respondent - authorities near the tank bund, the petitioner herein is permitted to make a representation to the competent respondent within two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this Order and after receipt of the same, the concerned respondent shall consider the same in accordance with law, in the light of the Government Order dated 21.02.2014 (Annexure-R1) and the terms and conditions

¶45