IMPORTANT POINT
Writ jurisdiction can address contractual disputes involving the State if no serious factual disputes exist, ensuring the State honors its obligations.

JUDGMENT :

T.S. Sivagnanam, C.J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Asansol challenging the order passed by the learned Single Bench in WP No. 756 (W) of 2007 dated 17.03.2023. The appellants/Income tax Department was impleaded as the respondents 2 to 5 in the writ petition. By the impugned order the learned Single Bench allowed the writ petition and directed the appellant Department to disburse to the writ petitioners the arrears of rent to Rs. 2,84,39,242/-in terms of the respondent CPWD revisions of rent for the period from January, 31, 1994 to June 30, 2021 and the payment was directed to be made positively by May 31, 2023 in default the Income Tax Department was directed to pay to the writ petitioner interest on such amount from 1st June, 2023, 16% per annum till the date of disbursement. The Income Tax Department was given liberty to institute a proper civil suit in respect of the money claimed on the alleged Municipal tax arrears and repair and maintenance charges, if incurred by the Income Tax Department, from the writ petitioners. If such a claim is made, the same was directed to be adjudicated in accordance with law by the competent civil Court upon following due process of law and nothing in the order passed in the writ petition shall prejudice the rights of the department in such suit if instituted by them within the period of limitation. The Income Tax Department being aggrieved by such directions has filed the present appeal.

2. We have elaborately heard Mr. Ashok Chakraborty, learned Additional Solicitor General assisted by Mr. Om Narayan Rai and Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department and Mr. Soumya Majumder and Mr. Gour Baran Sou, learned Advocates appearing for the contesting respondents/the writ petitioners.

3. The first point which has to be raised by the learned Additional Solicitor General is by contending that the learned Single Bench has virtually passed a money decree, adjudicated disputed, questions of fact and directed the sum of Rs. 2,84,39,242/-to be paid to the writ petitioners being the arrears of rent alleged to be payable to the writ petitioners. It is submitted that such a prayer is not maintainable since the matter is purely a contractual relationship between the owner of the building namely, writ petitioner and the appellant Department who had taken the building on rent. It is submitted that in such a contractual dispute purely in the private law realm writ petition is not maintainable when admittedly the contract is a non-statutory contract. In support of his contention the learned Additional Solicitor General relied upon the judgment of this Court in The Ghani Khan Choudhury Institute of Engineering and Technology & Ors. Versus Subham Enterprise & Ors. in MAT No. 1412 of 2023 etc. batch dated 02.05.2024.

4. The learned Advocate appearing for the respondents/writ petitioners contended that the writ petition was maintainable. There was no dispute on facts which were already on record and the appellant department willfully defaulted to pay the rents revised from time to time as per their CPWD Norms and as per the orders and instructions given by the Income Tax Department and the learned Single Bench rightly took note of the factual position had allowed the writ petition and issued the directions contained therein and the order does not call for any interference. With regard to the maintainability of the writ petition is concerned, it is no doubt true that in a non-statutory contract and when facts are in serious dispute a writ petition will not be maintainable.

5. In Ghani Khan Choudhury Institute judgment we have taken note of the legal position. In Paragraph 10 of the said judgment, we have noted the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India and Ors. Versus Puna Hinda, (2021) 10 SCC 690, Bharat Coking Coal Limited and Ors. Versus Amr Dev Prabha and Ors., (2020) 16 SCC 759 and M.P. Power Management Com