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

2024 Supreme(Gau) 49

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Devashis Baruah, J.
Manabedra Kumar Sarma – Petitioner
Versus
Board Of Control For Cricket In India Represented By Its Chairman And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C)/5220/2021, WP(C)/3891 & 4834 of 2020
Decided On : 15-02-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. A. C. Borbora, Sr. Advocate, Mr. B. P. Borah, Advocate, Mr. N. K. Kalita, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. D. Das, Sr. Advocate, Mr. B. Gogoi, Advocate, Mr. S. Khound, Advocate

Writ petitions for private contractual disputes are not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution, as they do not involve public law elements.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ petitions for mandamus to direct payment of contractual dues - Petitioners claimed amounts for works done at Barsapara Cricket Stadium, but ACA denied claims citing lack of documentation and maintainability issues - Court found disputes were private in nature and not amenable to writ jurisdiction. (Paras 28-30)

(B) Maintainability of Writ Petitions - Court held that disputes arising from private contracts do not invoke public law elements necessary for Article 226 - Serious disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated in writ proceedings. (Paras 29-34)

Facts of the case:
Three writ petitions were filed by contractors against the Assam Cricket Association for unpaid dues related to construction works at Barsapara Stadium, with claims totaling over Rs.16 crores. The ACA contended that the claims were unsupported by adequate documentation and involved private disputes.

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that the claims were private disputes not suitable for adjudication under Article 226, emphasizing the need for evidence and proper legal proceedings.

Issues: The main issues were whether the writ petitions were maintainable against the ACA and whether the court could adjudicate the disputes.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the nature of the disputes was private and did not involve public law elements, thus not suitable for writ jurisdiction.

Result: Writ petitions dismissed, but petitioners allowed to seek redress in civil court.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. A. C. Borbora, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. B. P. Borah, the learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No.4834/2020 and WP(C) No.3891/2020 and Mr. N. K. Kalita, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in WP(C) No.5220/2021. Also heard Mr. D. Das, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. B. Gogoi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Assam Cricket Association (ACA) and Mr. S. Khound, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (‘BCCI’)

2. Briefly stated, all the three writ petitions are filed claiming a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the concerned respondents to pay their contractual dues. For the purpose of deciding the dispute, this Court would like to state briefly the facts involved in each of the writ petition.

WP(C) No.3891/2020

3. This writ petition was filed by the petitioner which is a proprietorship firm claiming an amount of Rs.3,67,15,187.30p along with interest for the works done in the interior section of Barsapara Cricket Stadium pursuant to work orders issued by the ACA. It is the case of the petitioner that three work orders were issued by the Secretary of the ACA on 28.11.2013, 17.01.2014 and 04.09.2017 respectively. The said work orders have been enclosed as Annexure Nos. A, B and C to the writ petition. From a perusal of the writ petition, it reveals that the ACA had awarded a contract work for construction of the North and South Stand of Barsapara Stadium-Interior Work of a value of Rs.6,37,38,782/-. In terms with Annexure-B, the Secretary of the ACA informed the petitioner that the petitioner was awarded the work for construction of the North Stand and South Stand finishing work for President Lounge, Commentator Room/Lounge, Police Control Room, TV Control Room, Media work Station etc. at Barsapara Stadium of the ACA for an amount of Rs.5,77,21,945/-. In terms with Annexure-C, the Secretary of the ACA had issued another work order for construction of the Anti-doping Room, Umpire Entry to Ground Corridor, RC Box, ACA Box, Acoustical Room at Broadcast Rook, fittings with toughened class, frosted films and carpet for T20 Cricket Match between India vs. Australia on 10th of October, 2017 at ACA Stadium, Barsapara of an approximate value of Rs.75,52,500/-. It has been claimed by the petitioner that the petitioner duly completed the various works and out of the total amount due of Rs.12,34,65,187/- against the three work orders, an amount of Rs.8,67,50,000/- was paid and an amount of Rs.3,67,15,187.30p remain pending. It was also stated that the petitioner is entitled for refund of the security deposit to the tune of Rs.17,50,809/-against the three work orders. It is the case of the petitioner that various representations were submitted and the last one being on 29.08.2020, buts no payments were made for which the instant writ petition was filed on 03.09.2020.

4. This Court vide an order dated 06.10.2020 issued notice. The record reveals that an affidavit was filed by the respondent Nos.2 & 3 stating inter-alia that only copies of the work orders were found and there were no relevant documents relating to calling of tenders as well as documents justifying the work done or completed were found. It was also stated that there was no sufficient documents or materials available to justify the purported work claimed to have been executed by the petitioner. Further to that it was mentioned that an FIR was lodged by the ACA alleging misappropriation of funds during the period from 2016 to 2018 which was registered and numbered as Fatasi Ambari PS Case No. 817/2021, under Sections 120B/406/409/420/469/34 of the IPC. Further to that, the documents of the ACA were seized by the Assam Police on 26.07.2015 in connection with PIL No.47/2015, and accordingly, as per the Seizure Memo received from the Assam Police, the File bearing Sl. No.234 in the name of “Banka Constructions, interim work of North Stand of 2013”

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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