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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT JABALPUR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL

ON THE 20th OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

WRIT PETITION No. 21169 of 2022

BETWEEN:-

M/S KESHAV KANSHKAR A CLASS ELECTRICAL

CONTRACTOR THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR

KESHAV KANSHKAR S/O LATE SHRI GOVIND

PRASAD KANSHKAR AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS

WORKING AS

PROPRIETOR

NEAR

SNYAL

SCHOOL

DEVDARA

MANDLA

DISTRICT

MANDLA M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER

(BY SHRI SOURABH SUNDER, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF

ENERGY MANTRALAYA VALLABH BHAWAN

BHOPAL (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.

MADHYA PRADESH POORVA KSHETRA VIDYUT

VITRAN CO. LTD., THROUGH THE MANAGING

D I R ECTOR SHAKTI

BAHAWAN

RAMPUR

JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3.

THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, MADHYA

PRADESH POORVA KSHETRA VIDYUT VITRAN

CO. LTD. DISTRICT MANDLA M.P. (MADHYA

PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS

(BY SHRI PIYUSH BHATNAGAR, PANEL LAWYER FOR

RESPONDENT NO.1)

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the

following:

Advocates:
Mukesh Kumar Agrawal,Advocate General

Petitioner an Electrical Contractor has filed this writ petition under Article

226 of the Constitution of India claiming issuance of writ in the nature of

1

Digitally signed by MOHD TABISH KHAN

Date: 2022.09.23 19:50:36 IST

SAN

Signature Not Verified

mandamus directing the respondents especially respondent No.3 to release the

payment of the petitioner for the work carried out by the petitioner under

'Sobhagya Yojna Scheme' under which he had carried out work of supply of

material, survey, installation, testing and commissioning of 11 KV line, 11/4 KV

distribution transformers and LT line for un-electrified household in terms of the

NIT dated 23.10.2018.

It is submitted that as per Clause 6 of the NIT defect liability period was

12 months from the date of taking over/completion of facilities or any part

thereof in case of 11 KV line and LT line and 24 months for distribution

transformers but instead of making payment respondents have issued recovery

notice dated 13.12.2021 beyond the period of defect liability.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has taken this Court through order

dated 22.12.2021 passed in W.P. No.28386/2021 (Annexure P-4) in which as an

interim measure, the effect and operation of the order dated13.12.2021

(Annexure P-1) was stayed.

It is also submitted that under similar facts and circumstances a

Coordinate Bench has issued notices in W.P. No.20515/2022 and W.P.

No.20024/2022. Placing reliance on the order of Hon'ble Division Bench in

W.A. No.880/2022 where Hon'ble Division Bench has held that on the ground

of parity, the appellant too would be entitled to a similar interim relief. When it is

noted even by the learned Singh Judge that there have been four cases in which

interim relief has been granted, necessarily the appellant would also be entitled

to the same. To deny him the interim relief only because of the fact that the

matter requires to be heard finally in our prima facie view may not be

appropriate.

Placing reliance on this judgment it is submitted that since Coordinate

2

Digitally signed by MOHD TABISH KHAN

Date: 2022.09.23 19:50:36 IST

SAN

Signature Not Verified

Bench has issued notices in two cases petitioner is entitled to issuance of notice

in the present case as a matter of right.

'Precedent', refers to a court decision that is considered as authority for

deciding subsequent cases involving identical or similar facts, or similar issues.

'Precedent', is incorporated into the doctrine of 'stare decisis', and requires

courts to apply the law in the same manner to cases with the same facts.

'Judicial precedent', is the source of law where past decisions create law

for Judges to refer back to for guidance in future cases. Meaning of doctrine of

"stare decisis" to "stand by decided matters".

Thus, I am not in a position to agree that merely issuance of a notice by a

Coordinate Bench, under which provision of law, can be considered to be a

binding precedent as it does not lay down any proposition of law to be

followed in future.

Question of judicial discipline will arise when a decision is rendered by a

forum of superior or concurrent jurisdiction while adjudicating the rights of the

parties to a lis embodying a declaration of law. I do not see any declaration of

law in the discretion of a Coordinate Bench to issue notice in the matter.

As far as order dated 22.02.2021 is concerned. A perusal of the present

writ petition reveals that under Point No.8, dealing with interim relief, if prayed

for, petitioner has mentioned nil. Thus it is evident that when petitioner himself

is not praying interim relief in the present petition he is not entitled to seek any

parity with the orders of Coordinate Bench passed in W.P. No.28386/2021.

Issue involved is that whether in a contractual manner there exists an

agreement which has not been brought on record by the petitioner and

admittedly there is a pleading that there are disputes between the petitioner and

3

Digitally signed by MOHD TABISH KHAN

Date: 2022.09.23 19:50:36 IST

SAN

Signature Not Verified

the respondents in r

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top