Disputes relating to contracts cannot be agitated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and the invocation of contractual clauses X(c) and XII(c) by the FCI was legal.

By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prayed for the following reliefs:

I. ISSUE RULE, calling upon the respondents and each one of them, to show cause as to why a Writ of Certiorari and/or in the nature thereof, for calling for the records, lying with the respondents, for rendering substantive and conscionable justice to the petitioner, for quashing/setting aside the impugned Communication dated 19.10.2010, Communication dated 20.10.2010, Order dated 24.11.2010, Order dated 24.02.2011, Demand Notice dated 19.03.2011, Demand Notice dated 02.04.2011, Order dated 01.06.2011, Demand Notice dated 18.06.2011, Demand Notice dated 21.07.2011, and Demand Notice dated 26.08.2011 (Annexure-P4, Annexure-P5, annexure-P/7, Annexure-P10, Annexure-P11, Annexure-P12, Annexure-P16, Annexure-P17, Annexure-P18, and Annexure-P19 respectively supra);

II. ISSUE RULE, calling upon the respondents and each one of them, to show cause as to why a Writ of Mandamus and/or in the nature thereof, shall not be issued, for mandating/directing them, to revoke/rescind the above referred impugned Communications/Orders/Demands, and to return a finding that no penalty, under Clause-XC of the Agreement, nor any compensation, under Clause-XVII of the Agreement, is leviable on to the petitioner;

(III) ISSUE RULE, calling upon the respondents and each one of them, to show cause as to why a Writ of Prohibition and/or in the nature thereof, shall not be issued, for restraining/injuncting them, from acting in any manner, in furtherance of the said impugned Communication dated 19.10.2010, Communication dated 20.10.2010, Order dated 24.11.2010, Order dated 24.02.2011, Demand Notice dated 19.03.2011, Demand Notice dated 02.04.2011, Order dated 01.06.2011, Demand Notice dated 18.06.2011, Demand Notice dated 21.07.2011, and Demand Notice dated 26.08.2011 (Annexure-P4, Annexure-P5, Annexure-P7, Annexure-P10, Annexure-P11, Annexure-P12, Annexure-P16, Annexure-P17, Annexure-P18, and Annexure-P19 respectively supra);

IV) In the Adinterim, as well as in the interim, an ORDER in terms of ii & iii. above.

V) CALL FOR THE RECORDS appertaining to this petition;

VI) After hearing the parties, be pleased to make the RULE ABSOLUTE in terms of i. to iv. above.

VII) Any other RELIEF(s) as to this Hon’ble High Court may deem fit and proper;…”

2. Heard learned counsel Mr. S. Deb for the petitioner on 28.09.2015. There was no representation on behalf of the respondents at the time when the case was taken up for hearing. Later on learned counsel Mr. A. Nandi appeared but in the meantime Mr. Deb, learned counsel of the petitioner left the Court long before arrival of Mr. Nandi and under such circumstances Mr. Nandi prayed for allowing him to submit a written brief on behalf of the respondents and his prayer was allowed. Learned counsel Mr. Deb at the conclusion of his argument proposed to submit a written brief and he was allowed to submit it within 3(three) days but Mr. Deb did not submit any written brief ultimately. Mr. Nandi submitted a written brief and that has been taken into consideration.

3. It is an admitted position that the petitioner is a carrying contractor by profession. Pursuant to a notice inviting tender issued by the Food Corporation of India (for short, FCI), Regional office at Shillong, for carrying food grains/sugar/allied materials from Railway siding/FSD, Churaibari to FSD, Chandrapur for a period of 2(two) years. The petitioner and some other carrying contractors participated in the tender process and the tender of the petitioner along with other contractors were accepted and a work order was issued by the Deputy General Manager (NEFR) on 29.04.2009 advising the petitioner and other contractors to start work w.e.f. 30.04.2009. A copy of the work order annexed as Annexure-P/1 to the writ petition. It is also an admitted p