The petitioner challenged the arbitrary withdrawal of a work order awarded for water tankers. The Court held that it need not examine maintainability of writs for contractual disputes. It declined to exercise discretion to entertain specific performance of a non-statutory agreement and dismissed the petition.
Writ petition dismissed. No costs.
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.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
WRIT PETITION NO.11860 OF 2010
ORDER:
In this Writ Petition, the petitioner questions termination of his agreement, by proceedings dated 11.05.2010, as arbitrary and illegal.
Facts, in brief, are that the petitioner participated in the tender process held in March, 2010 and, on his being found to be the successful bidder, an agreement was entered into and a work order was issued in his favour on 01.04.2010. The petitioner would submit that he was entrusted the work on 13.04.2010. While matters stood thus the 1st respondent, vide proceedings dated 11.05.2010, directed the petitioner, who under the agreement dated 1.4.2010 was issued work order for supply of 4 to 5 trips of water tankers to Mandasa town to, henceforth, transport water to nine other habitations. The work awarded to the petitioner earlier, for transportation of water for five trips to Mandasa town, was withdrawn with immediate effect.
Sri K. Manik prabhu, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would contend that such withdrawal of the work order is arbitrary and illegal. Learned Counsel would submit that, even in the case of a concluded contract, a writ petition is maintainable; and the petitioner’s grievance, that the work order issued in his favour was terminated without assigning any reasons, is a matter which this
Court ought to examine in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The petitioner, in effect, seeks specific performance of the agreement dated 01.04.2010. It is wholly unnecessary for this Court to go into the question of maintainability of a Writ Petition involving contractual disputes in as much as, even if such a Writ Petition is held to be maintainable, the question whether or not disputes, relating to termination of a non-statutory agreement which is not in the public law realm, should be entertained is a matter of discretion of this Court. I see no reason to exercise discretion to entertain a Writ Petition seeking specific performance of a non-statutory agreement. Leaving it open to the petitioner, if he so chooses, to approach the competent Civil Court in this regard, the writ petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs.
____________________________ 07.06.2010 RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J MRKR
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition for specific performance of a non-statutory agreement and termination of a work order is maintainable.
Whether this Court should exercise discretion to entertain a dispute regarding the termination of a non-statutory agreement outside the public law realm.
Petitioner
1st Respondent
Ramesh Ranganathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
