SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(Pat) 66

PATNA HIGH COURT
S.B.Sinha, J.
Northern India Seeds Corporation And Seeds India
Versus
State Of Bihar
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5906 of 1989 ; 1988 of 1989 ; 9605 of 1989 ;
Decided On : FEBRUARY 17, 1993

Headnote:Constitution of India, Art 12, 226 - Contract entered with Biscomaun not being a State within meaning of Art 12 and the contract was between two parties - contract was not entered under provisions of statute and was qua-contract - enforcement thereof is not permissible by invoking Art 226 - AIR 1977 SC 1496, 1991 (1) PLJR 352 - 1991 BBCJ, 1985 PLJR 1078, 1993 (1) BLJR 29 ref. (Paras 128, 44, 45, 46, 47 & 68)

       Constitution of India Art 226 & 227 - Writ of mandamus prayed for directing the respondents to make payment of money - no writ lies for enforcing a pure money claim - AIR 1977 SC 1496, AIR 1989 SC 1076 & 1992 BBCJ 670 ref. (Paras 28, 48, 49 & 50)

       Constitution of India Art 226 & 227 - parties entering contract containing clause for arbitration - writ not maintainable - AIR 1976 SC 127 & 1975 SC 1967 ref. (Paras 29, 52 & 53)

       Constitution of India, Art 226 & 227 - exercise of direction by the High Court - alternative remedy and delay in filing the application - writ disclosing disputed questions of fact - it is true that in an appropriate case, the court may not refuse to exercise its discretion only because there exist an alternative remedy - when the dispute is between the parties to a contract being non-statutory and involves determination of serious disputed question of fact, the court should not exercise its writ jurisdiction - the Court does not ordinarily dismiss the writ application after admitting the same - however, exercise of such discretion depends upon the fact of each case - where the disputed questions of facts had to be gone into, the court may not exercise its direction under Art 226 - AIR 1964 SC 1006, AIR 1965 SC 1740, AIR 1982 SC 101, 1992 BBCJ 519, 1977 BBCJ 141, AIR 1974 SC 1984 PLJR 597 ref. & rel. on. (Paras 54, 64, 65 & 67)

Judgment

S.B.Sinha, J.

1. Both these writ applications involving common question of fact and law were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.

3. In these writ applications the petitioners have questioned the orders passed by the District Magistrate, Patna (Respondent No. 4) whereby he directed the Bihar State Co-operative Marketing Union (hereinafter to be referred as Biscomaun) not to make any payment for seeds/gram seeds supplied by the petitioner till further orders.

4. The said orders are contained in Annexures-4 and 7 to the afore mentioned writ petitions respectively.

5. In or about August, 1984, tender notices were issued for supply of seeds/gram seeds for the Rabi crops for the year 1984-85. On 10-9-1984 the petitioners submitted their tenders and rates for supply of seeds of different qualities were finalised thereafter upon negotiation.

6. On or about 30-9-1984 the Deputy Managing Director of Biscomaun by its letter No. M 1320 and M 1327 placed orders to the petitioners of C.W.J.C. 9605 of 1989 for supply of three thousand quintals of certified Masur seeds as also two thousand quintals of certified Linseeds and two thousand quintals of gram seeds and one thousand quintals of Masoor seeds to its different depots to the petitioner of C.W.J.C. 5906 of 1988 respectively. The said orders are contained in Annexure 1 to each of the with application.

7. On 2-10-1984 the petitioners of C.W.J.C. 5906 of 1988 received another latter giving details of the depots and quantities of Masoor and Gram seeds required to be supplied by them by 15-10-1984.

8. On 7-10-1984 a circular was issued by Deputy Managing Director of Biscomaun to all senior Regional, Officers giving directions for distribution of fertilisers and seeds. The said circular letter dated 7-10-1984 is contained in Annexure 3 to the writ application of C.W.J.C. 9605 of 1989.

9. According to the petitioners, they have completed the supply of the seeds within the stipulated period.

10. By order dated 21-3-1985, however, the District Magistrate informed the Managing Director, Biscornaun to stop payment the petitioners against the supplies made by them. The said letter dated 21-3-1985 is contained in Annexure 4 to the C.W.J.C. 9605 of 1989.

11. On 31-5-1985 the Dy. Managing Director, Biscomaun issued notices to the petitioners as to why payment for supply of seeds shall not be stopped. The said notice dated 31-5-1985 is contained in Annexure 5 to each of the writ application. The petitioners filed their respective show causes which are contained in Annexure 6 to each of the writ application.

12. On 19-9-1985 the Managing Director, Biscomaun wrote a letter to the Director, Agriculture (Respondent No. 2) seeking his legal and technical relaxation to the points raised in the said show cause so that the points and objections raised by the District Magistrate may be met. The said letter dated 19-9-1985 is contained in Annexure 8 to each of the writ application.

13. On 26-8-1986 Biscomaun sent another letter enclosing a copy of the letter dated 19-9-1985 and again sought for a guidance from the Director, Agriculture. The said letter dated 26-8-1986 is contained in Annexure 9 to each of the writ application.

14. The petitioners have further contended that one M/s. Rajesh Tarding Company filed a writ petition in this Court which was marked as C.W.J.C. No. 3395 of 1987. By an order dated 25-8-1987 a Division Bench of this Court allowed the said writ application. The said order dated 25-8-1987 is contained in Annexure 10 to each of the writ application.

15. Biscomaun, thereafter, preferred Special Leave Petition before Supreme Court which was registered as S.L.P. (Civil) No. 13870 of 1987 and by an order dated 26-11-1987 the said S.L.P. was dismissed. It appears that the District Magistrate had also preferred a Special Leave Petition against the said judgment which was also dismissed by an
































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top