IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that contractual obligations must be fulfilled by both parties, and local issues do not absolve the petitioner from compliance with the contract terms.

JUDGMENT :

(Shampa Sarkar, J.) :

1. These three writ petitions were heard analogously as the issues involved were connected and the parties were the same.

2. In WPA 10928 of 2020, the writ petitioner prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities, namely, the Bankura Zilla Parishad and its men, agents and subordinates to hand over the toll booth sites for 22 numbers of roads, which were allotted to the petitioner in terms of the agreement and the work order dated December 16, 2019. Further prayer was made for a direction upon the authorities to support the petitioners in setting up the said toll collection booths. Police assistance was also prayed for in order to ensure smooth functioning of the booths, along with a prayer for compensation of Rs.20 lakhs for the harassment caused to the petitioner.

3. W.P.A 6190 of 2022 was filed for a mandamus upon the Bankura Zilla Parishad and its men and agents to alter the roads on which the booths were originally to be set up as per the work order, with a further prayer for support and assistance to operate the booths to be set up in the newly proposed sites as mentioned in the petitioner’s representations dated November 30, 2021 and January 4, 2022. Such prayer for alternative roads was allegedly made due to changed circumstances. Deterioration in the condition of those 22 roads , objections by the forest department and the local administrations to setting up of the booths in the existing sites and reduction in the number of commercial vehicles engaged in the quarry of sand and other materials, led the petitioner to make a request for change of sites.

4. WPA 27047 of 2022 was filed with a prayer for quashing and or setting aside the demand notices dated November 9, 2022/ November 10, 2022, issued by the Bankura Zilla Parishad, with a further prayer upon the Zilla Parishad to recalculate the annual payment to be made proportionately, from the date of commencement of actual operations. Prayer was also made for assistance in the smooth setting up and functioning of the toll booths.

5. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petitions, as per the petitioner’s version, are enumerated below:-

(a) The petitioner as the proprietor of M/S S. Nandi, participated in the e-Tender process initiated by the Additional District Magistrate, Bankura and the Additional Executive officer, Bankura Zilla Parishad. The first notice inviting e-Tender vide memo no.3235/ZP/16, dated August 18, 2016, for collection of toll tax at 22 roads, under the Bankura Zilla Parishad, was cancelled. The petitioner had qualified as the highest bidder. Notice inviting e-Tender dated January 6, 2017, vide memo No.65/ZP/17, and a corrigendum dated February 9, 2017, for collection of toll tax in respect of those 22 roads was again published. The proprietorship firm of the petitioner participated in the second e-Tender process and qualified both in the technical and financial rounds. The respondent No.5, by order dated January 27, 2017, vide memo No.241/ ZP/ 17, directed the petitioner/firm to execute an agreement on a non-judicial stamp paper of Rs.10 and to deposit Rs.1,01,01,111/-in the form of a bank draft in favour of the Financial Controller and Accounts Officer, Bankura Zilla Parishad, i.e., the respondent No.6. Accordingly, the petitioner/firm deposited the said amount on February 10, 2017, through a demand draft, which was duly acknowledged by the said respondent.

(b) By the corrigendum dated February 9, 2017, an additional condition was imposed to the effect that 90% of the toll points should be operated by an electronic system and manual collection of tolls would not be permitted. CCTV cameras with functioning internet and power backup, were also required to be installed. Accordingly, the petitioner incurred huge investment of more than Rs.60 lakhs for the purpose. In spite of completion of all formalities, the Bankura Zilla Parishad refused to execute the agreement and also failed to issue the work