IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.B. Pardiwala, Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, JJ.
Cube Construction Engineering Limited Through Sanjay D. Shah, Director – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 11486 of 2021
Decided On : 07-10-2021
Constitution of India,1950 – Article 14,32 and 226 - Contract Act, 1872 – Section 4,8 and 62 - Levy or tax – Cess – Contracts – Mandamus- Fairness in State action is soul of good governance - Every action of State where it infringes constitutional mandate or is opposed to basic rule of law or suffers from infirmity of patent arbitrariness, judicial intervention is inevitable - Government enjoys great freedom while entering into contracts with private parties, but even that freedom is circumscribed by rule of fairness, transparency and objectivity - That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to forthwith release pending payment qua Work Order to the petitioners - Whether recourse to a public law remedy can justifiably be invoked.
Finding of the court : That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents to forthwith release pending payment qua Work Order to petitioners - Having regard to the facts of present case, it could be said without any hesitation that stance of respondents is unfair and unreasonable - Having fixed rates and having asked the writ-applicants to undertake the work of contract as fast as possible and being fully satisfied with work undertaken by writ-applicants within stipulate time period, respondents cannot turn around and say that rates at the relevant point of time were fixed on a higher side and, therefore, writ-applicants should not insist for the full payment - Having fixed rates in a concluded contract and having got the entire work of contract completed, it is not fair on the part of respondents to compare rates of the writ-applicants with any other contractor - Another contractor which the respondents are talking about might have used imported materials, but it is not case of the respondents that writ-applicant has used inferior quality of materials - Court are left with no other option but to agree with each and every submission put forward by learned senior counsel appearing for writ-applicants
Result: Writ-application allowed.
JUDGMENT :
J.B. PARDIWALA, J.
1. This litigation disappoints us a lot. This is a litigation in which the State (principal) is telling the contractor (writ-applicant) that we did award a work of contract in your favour during the period of crisis, i.e. during the Covid pandemic lockdown, to be completed within a period of ten days from the issue of the work order. The State says that it did fix the terms and conditions of the contract, including the rates to be paid to the contractor. The State further says that the contractor did a remarkable job by completing the entire work to its satisfaction within a period of ten days. The State also says that, in accordance with the work order and the rates fixed, the contractor may be entitled to claim the requisite amount. However, in the end, the State says that we will not pay the full bill amount to the contractor as the State now believes that the fixation of the rates at the relevant point of time was a very hasty decision on their part and that the rates fixed at the relevant point of time were on a higher side.
2. The aforesaid stance of the State has led to the present litigation.
3. Fairness in State action is the soul of good governance. Every action of the State where it infringes the constitutional mandate or is opposed to basic rule of law or suffers from the infirmity of patent arbitrariness, judicial intervention is inevitable. Government enjoys great freedom while entering into contracts with private parties, but even that freedom is circumscribed by the rule of fairness, transparency and objectivity. It is more so where the Government is dealing with State largesse. The State holds monopoly in certain fields and where this privilege of monopoly is utilized for the purposes of allocation of works, it takes the colour of State largesse as both the State or its instrumentalities or public statutory bodies and the bidder are expected to benefit from such distribution and/or allocation of such works by way of contracts.
4. By this writ-application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ-applicants have prayed for the following reliefs :
(aa) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the letter/order dated 05.08.2021 being a non-speaking order and issued in stark violation of the agreed upon Work Order conditions;
(b) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the Work Order dated 17.09.2020 and 20.10.2020;
(c) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to hold and declare that unilateral alteration of rates by the respondents, after completion of works amounts to arbitrary exercise of powers as also amounts to breach of principles of natural justice;
(d) That pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to release the pending payment to the petitioners qua Work Order No.209 and Work Order No.212;
(e) That this Hon’ble court may be pleased to issue adinterim ex-parte relief in terms of Para (d) herein above;
(f) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to award cost of the present petition to the petitioners;
(g) Pass such other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
5. The facts giving rise to this writ-application may be summarised as under :
ABL International Ltd. vs. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India
Barauni Refinery Pragatisheel Shramik Parishad vs. Indian Oil Corporation Limited
Binny Limited and Another vs. Sadasivan and others
Central Bank of India vs. Devi Ispat Ltd. and others
Citi Bank N A vs. Standard Chartered Bank
Col. A.S. Sangwan vs. Union of India
Delhi Development Authority and another vs. Joint Action Committee, Allottee of SFS Flats and others
Divisional Forest Officer vs. Biswanath Tea Co Ltd.; State Bank of Haryana vs. Jage Ram
Dwarkadas Marfatia & Sons vs. Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay
E.P. Royappa vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Gujarat State Financial Corporation v. Lotus Hotels (P) Ltd. (1983) 3 SCC 379
Gunwant Kaur v. Municipal Committee, Bhatinda
Har Shankar v. Dy. Excise & Taxation Commr.
Harbanslal Sahnia v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd (2003) 2 SCC 107
J.P.Builders vs. A.Ramadas Rao
Joshi Technologies International Inc. vs. Union of India and others (2015) 7 SCC 728
K.N.Guruswamy vs. State of Mysore
Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi etc. etc. vs. State of U.P. and others
Liberty Oil Mills vs. Union of India
Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. Asha Goel
Mahabir Auto Stores vs. Indian Oil Corpn.
Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India
Nawabkhan Abbaskhan vs. State of Gujarat
Noble Resources vs. State of Orissa and another (2006) 10 SCC 236
Polymat India P. Ltd. and another vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and others
Radhakrishna Agarwal and others vs. State of Bihar and others
Ram Baral Singh & Co. v. State of Bihar
Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India
Ramana Dayaram Shetty vs. The International Airport Authority of India and others
Ramlal & Sons v. State of Rajasthan
Rishi Kiran Logistics vs. Board of Trustees of Kandla Port and others (2015) 13 SCC 233
S.G. Jaisinghani vs. Union of India
Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. vs. CCE and Customs
Shiv Shankar Dal Mills v. State of Haryana
Shrilekha Vidyarthi (Kumari) vs. State of U.P.
Suganmal vs. State of M.P. and others
Surya Constructions vs. State of U.P. and others
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. MKJ Co-operation
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.