Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 not invocable for pure contractual disputes with fixed terms; civil court remedy appropriate.

J U D G M E N T

This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner, seeking the following reliefs:-

a) Call for the records leading upto Ext.P13 and P15 and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction.

b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to collect parking fee from the areas as per cl.9 in Ext.P8 agreement for a further period of six months from 09-04-2026 without insisting for any payment from the petitioner in view of non-collection of parking fee from areas as evidenced by Ext.P4, P9[a] and P10.

c) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents not to invite any fresh bid/tender/auction for collecting parking fee from areas noted in cl.9 in Ext.P8 agreement until orders are passed in the case of the petitioner by this Hon’ble Court.

d) Issue such other appropriate writs, orders or directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

e) Dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular documents produced by the petitioner in the above case.

2. The petitioner was entrusted with the task of collecting parking fees in the property owned by the 1^st respondent. Ext.P2 is the original agreement executed between the petitioner and the Chief Executive Officer of the Alappuzha Canal Management Society which was managing the property at the relevant time. According to the petitioner, due to Covid-19 restrictions, the petitioner could not collect the fees for some time. Therefore, a request was submitted for enlargement of time.

3. In the meanwhile, the 2^nd respondent took over the management of the property and a fresh work agreement was agreement as per Ext.P5. Accordingly, as per the fresh agreement, the petitioner was granted the right of collecting the fee for a period of five years from 18.10.2021. After expiry of the said period, a further agreement was executed, as evidenced by Ext.P8, permitting the petitioner to collect fee for a further period of one year more. Now the said period is over, and the petitioner seeks further extension of period for collecting the fee. Even though a request in this regard as per Ext.P13 was submitted, the same was rejected by the 1^st respondent and even though an objection was submitted against the same, the said finding was reiterated in Ext.P15. This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner in these circumstances challenging Exts.P13 and P15.

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I am of the view that, the reliefs sought by the petitioner are beyond the scope of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This is because, the right to collect the parking fees, was obtained by the petitioner based on the contracts executed between the petitioner and the respondents. A specific time limit was contemplated therein to collect the fees. Admittedly, the said period is over. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim the same as of right.

Therefore, I am of the view that, as the reliefs sought by the petitioner are pertaining to the contractual rights of the parties, based on a commercial contract, the same cannot be adjudicated in a writ jurisdiction. Of course, the learned counsel for the petitioner raised various contentions, which according to the petitioner prevented him from effectively enjoying the benefits of the contract, during the subsistence of the same. However, that by itself cannot be reason to invoke the powers of this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India. If at all the petitioner has any grievance, the remedy of the petitioner is to approach the civil court, seeking appropriate relie