IMPORTANT POINT
Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked when alternate statutory remedies are available; allegations of corruption were deemed civil disputes.

JUDGMENT :

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

1. The present Appeal under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, 1950 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’ hereinafter) has been filed by the Petitioners for directing Respondent No.1 & 2 to initiate action against the large scale corruption in the work of development of ITPO Complex. Pragati Maidan, New Delhi and for registration of FIR.

2. Briefly stated, for the purpose of renovation of the Hall of Pragati Maidan, the Work contract was awarded by Chairman-cum-Managing Director of Indian Trade Promotion Organisation, Pragati Maidan, New Delhi (hereinafter called as ‘ITPO’)/Respondent No.5, to National Building Construction Corporation (‘NBCC’)/Respondent No.6.

3. NBCC awarded the work to Respondent No.7/Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Pvt. Ltd. for redevelopment of the ITPO Complex. The Respondent No.7 floated various Tenders for demolition of the existing structure on the Project site. The Work Contract for sale of Building Foundation Material (including the steel, plumbing, air conditioning and power units etc.) from Hall No.18 along with Admin Block and 2 Annexes, was awarded to BS Enterprises through Sh. Siddharth Chaudhary. However, BS Enterprises defaulted in making the full payment to Respondent No.7 and the Work Contract was awarded to Petitioner No.1-M/s Times Trading Corporation on 18.12.2017. The Work Contract dated 18.12.2017 was as follows:

“Credit for Sale of All Building material (like Structural, Plumbing, Electrical etc.) from Hall No. 18 along with Admin & 2 nos. Annex at Re-Development of Pragati Maidan Complex into Integrated Exhibition-cum-Convention Centre, New Delhi site ... " .

4. Soon after the Petitioner started the work at site, officials of Respondent No.7 started creating various obstructions for the workers and staff of the Petitioner No.1 by not letting them complete their work with the objective of sabotaging the Work Contract for which the payment of Rs. 4 Crore had already been made by the Petitioner.

5. Further, a portion of the Work already allotted to the Petitioner under the Work Contract was dishonestly awarded to M/s Green Life Infrastructure Development Corporation on 20.01.2018 for an amount of Rs.1,80,00,000/-, which read as under :

“Credit for Sale of All Building material (like Structure, Plumbing, Electrical etc) from Buildings as mentioned in BOQ (enclosed) at Re-development of Pragati maidan Complex into Integrated Exhibition-cum-Convention Centre, New Delhi site ... " The description provided that, "Sale of All Building Materials-from Buildings as mentioned in BOQ (attached)" and the BOQ specifically provided for II AC Plant for Hall No. 18”.

6. It is claimed that the items sold to Petitioner No.1 were illegally resold to M/s Green Life Infrastructure Development Corporation.

7. The Petitioner in response to an RTI Application dated 17.02.2018, got a Reply dated 26.02.2018 from Public Information Officer, from where he came to know that the dismantling and demolition of Admin Block (Pragati Maidan), which was part of the Work Contract of the Petitioner, was not in possession of Respondent No.7 at the time of entering in to the Contract and was to be handed over by NBCC/Respondent No.6 only on 15.03.2018.

8. The Petitioner accordingly, lodged a Complaint with Commissioner of Police which was recorded vide DD No.51B alleging fraud and loss caused to the Petitioner, but since no action was taken, he again made a Complaint which was registered vide DD No.37B dated 23.03.2018. A Representation dated 09.03.2018 was also made by the Petitioner to CMD of the Respondent No. 5 and 6 respectively, highlighting the alleged misconduct of Respondent No. 7. The Petitioner No.1 wrote another Letter dated 26.03.2018 to CMD, ITPO again highlighting the alleged misconduct and to take requisite action.

9. The Respondent No.7 on the pretext to settle and compensate the Petitioner No.1 for the damage and loss suffered by him, entered into