In the absence of documentation and terms of the contract, the court cannot decide the issue between the petitioner and the respondents.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 2 & 3 to disburse the amount of Rs.58,49,208/- towards transportation and handling charges payable to the petitioner for the contract period from 2014 to 2016 under the scheme for priceless article distribution forthwith to the petitioner.)

1. The petitioner is a transport Contractor and he has been selected for transportation of free articles such as Mixer-Jar, Fan and Grinder from the Government godown to the distribution centres, as per the direction of revenue officials. The nature of the contract is to transport the priceless articles from the godown to the field distribution centres. The petitioner has approached this Court with a grievance that though he has performed the contract, the respondents have failed to pay his statutory dues for handling and transporting the priceless articles. According to the petitioner, for the contract period 2013-14 i.e., third phase, the respondents 2 & 3 have to pay a sum of Rs.1,81,000/- and for the period of 2014-16 i.e., fourth and fifth phases, they have to pay a sum of Rs.58,49,208/-. Claiming these dues payable by the respondents 2 & 3, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a mandamus to disburse the sum of Rs.58,49,208/- for the contract done from 2014 to 2016 with an interim prayer for a sum of Rs.1,81,000/- and also for disbursing the excess tax amount deducted by the respondents.

2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is appointed as the Contractor for the distribution of priceless articles and the petitioner has also performed his duty without any defect. However, the transportation charges were not settled to the petitioner for the years 2014-15 and 2015-16. He also submitted that respondents 2 and 3 are entitled to detect only 2% of Sales Tax, but they have detected 6% of Sales Tax as against the rules in excess. The concerned Tahsildars have expected extraneous considerations from the petitioner and since the petitioner did not oblige to the same, the respondents 2 and 3 have been instructed not to disburse the transportation charges to the petitioner.

3. The second respondent / District Collector filed a counter affidavit stating that the petitioner was selected as a transport Contractor by the Managing Director of TNCSC for a period of five years and the transportation charges for the three phases, viz., 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, were settled to the petitioner as per the agreement. The terms of the contract are that the petitioner has to transport from the storage points to the facilities in seven constituencies in Virudhunagar District. However, the petitioner has done the transportation only in three villages in Srivilliputur and failed to transport in other villages in the remaining constituencies. Due to these defaults in the transportation by the petitioners, the Tahsildars concerned have themselves made an interim arrangement for transporting the goods from the storage points by engaging private vehicles. Based on the report of the Tahsildars, a separate report was also sent to the Managing Director of TNCSC, Chennai in letter No.Roc.I8/4439/2013 dated 14.02.2014.

4. The counter affidavit further reads that no bills of this petitioner are pending in the office of the District Collector. The petitioner, without any documents or bills for the transportation of priceless articles, is claiming the amount and on the failure of the petitioner, the Tahsildars have completed the transportation work within the Virudhunagar Districts. The petitioner transported the priceless articles only in three villages in Srivilliputur, for which a bill amount of Rs.1,50,319/- was already settled to the petitioner vide cheque dated 08.03.2014. Further, based on the report of the second respondent, the Regional Manager, TNCSC, Virudhunagar, has also called for an explanation from the petitione