Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 40382
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.Dhandapani, J
A.VANATHAI – Appellant
Versus
TAMIL NADU FOREST PLANTATION CORPORATION LTD. – Respondent
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. J.Antony Jesus
For the Respondents: Dr. T.Seenivasan
Courts can direct consideration of refund representation on merits without entering into case merits in government contract disputes.
Headnote:Statute Analysis: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to refund a sum of Rs.82,825/- paid by the petitioner to respondents towards auction for cutting trees, with interest from the date of payment. Facts of the Case: Petitioner paid Rs.82,825/- as advance amount, towards income tax, security deposit as well as the balance auction amount for cutting 249 dried and insect infected trees. Despite payments made, permission for cutting trees was not granted.
Findings of Court:
This Court does not go into the merits of the case and directs the petitioner to submit a representation to the respondents within a period of weeks. The respondents are to consider and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks. Iss
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner payment for tree cutting auction and denied permission. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court directs representation for refund without examining merits. (Para 3 , 4) |
..Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to refund a sum of Rs.82,825/- paid by the petitioner to respondents towards auction for cutting trees, with interest from the date of payment.
For Petitioner: Mr. J.Antony Jesus For Respondents: Dr. T.Seenivasan
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed directing the respondents to refund a sum of Rs.82,825/- paid by the petitioner to respondents towards auction for cutting trees, with interest from the date of payment.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit hat though the 2nd respondent issued work order to the petitioner on 16.11.2022 for cutting 249 dried and insect infected trees and despite the advance amount, amount towards income tax, security deposit as well as the balance auction amount being paid by the petitioner, the 2nd and 3rd respondents are not permitting the petitioner to carry out his work. In this regard, the petitioner sent a communication to the 1st respondent on 10.10.2023, requesting them to grant permission to him to cut 249 trees as per auction. Thereafter, he sent a legal notice to the respondents on 07.12.2023 demanding him to refund the auction amount of Rs.82,825/- paid by the petitioner with interest, for which the 2nd respondent sent a reply alleging delay on the part of the petitioner in cutting the trees, by suppressing the fact that permission was not granted by the respondents to the petitioner for cutting the trees. Hence, this petition.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioners may be directed to submit a representation to the respondents, seeking refund of the aforesaid amount and on such representation being made, the respondent concerned will consider and pass orders on the same on merits and in accordance with law, within a stipulated period.
4. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side, this Court without going into the merits of the case, permits the petitioner to submit a representation to the respondents, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such representation being made, the respondent concerned is directed to consider and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period four weeks thereafter.
5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
