TMI Blog2001 (12) TMI 889X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... There was also a direction to make payments in the remaining cases strictly in accordance with the seniority of the bills under the respective head of accounts and subject to availability of funds, on the principle 'first done first paid'. 2. Coming to the latter decision, it may be seen that it is a case where the State filed Writ Appeal against the direction issued by the learned single Judge following Anirudhan's case (1999 (2) Ker LJ 252) in various writ petitions. The main contention raised by the State was maintainability with particular reference to the prerogative writ of mandamus and the Division Bench held as follows :- The Original Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of mandamus for enforcement of the contractual obligation, viz., payment of amount to the contractors in a contract, which is non-statutory, cannot be enforced through Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioners have to approach the Civil Court for enforcement of the contractual obligations. It was also held that : Conditions in the contract provide for everything including for payment under the contract and also for termination of the contract, recovery of d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State, Sri S. Venkatasubramania Iyer, Senior Counsel, Sri K.M. Joseph and others appearing for the parties, we learn that unfortunately many of the crucial legal aspects on the issue have not been brought to the notice of the Division Bench in the said appeals. We do not want to refer extensively to the catena of decisions of the Apex Court. Yet, in view of the latter decision on maintainability, it has become necessary to refer to a few. 6. In Smt. Gunwant Kaur v. Municipal Committee, Bhatinda, (1969) 3 SCC 769 : (AIR 1970 SC 802), the Supreme Court held as follows (at p. 805 of AIR) : 14. The High Court observed that they will not determine disputed question of fact in a writ petition. But what facts were in dispute and what were admitted could only be determined after an affidavit in reply was filed by the State. The High Court, however, proceeded to dismiss the petition in limine. The High Court is not deprived of its jurisdiction to entertain a petition under Article 226 merely because in considering the petitioner's right to relief questions of fact may fall to be determined. In a petition under Article 226 the H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is sufficient to import at least the minimal requirements of public law obligations and impress with this character the contracts made by the State or its instrumentality. It is a different matter that the scope of judicial review in respect of disputes falling within the domain of contractual obligations may be more limited and in doubtful cases the parties may be relegated to adjudication of their rights by resort to remedies provided for adjudication of purely contractual disputes. However, to the extent, challenge is made on the ground of violation of Article 14 by alleging that the impugned act is arbitrary, unfair or unreasonable, the fact that the dispute also falls within the domain of contractual obligations would not relieve the State of its obligation to comply with the basic requirements of Article 14. To this extent, the obligation is of a public character invariably in every case irrespective of there being any other right or obligation in addition thereto. An additional contractual obligation cannot divest the claimant of the guarantee under Article 14 of non-arbitrariness at the hands of the State in any of its actions. It was further held that (at p. 550 of AI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limitations, it is well settled that the arm of the Court is long enough to strike at injustice wherever it is found. 12. In Air India Statutory Corporation v. United Labour Union, (1997) 9 SCC 377 : (AIR 1997 SC 645). it was observed as follows (Paras 59, 60 at p. 630 of AIR) : Founding Fathers placed no limitation or fetters on the power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution except self-imposed limitations. The arm of the Court is long enough to reach injustice wherever it is found. The Court as 'sentinel on the qui vive' is to mete out justice in given facts.......... The public law remedy given by Article 226 of the Constitution is to issue not only the prerogative writs provided therein but also any order or direction to enforce any of the fundamental rights and for any other purpose . 13. Yet another decision referring to interference in contractual matters is one reported in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Dolly Das, (1999) 4 SCC 450, wherein it is held as follows : 9. We may now advert to the contention that the writ remedy is not appropriate in this case. Where interpretation of a contract arises in relation to immovable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontractual rights and obligations which involve disputed questions of facts. The Courts have consistently taken the view that in a case where for determination of the dispute raised, it is necessary to inquire into facts for determination of which it may become necessary to record oral evidence a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution, is not the appropriate forum. The position is also well settled that if the contract entered between the parties provide an alternate forum for resolution of disputes arising from the contract, then the parties should approach the forum agreed by them and the High Court in writ jurisdiction should not permit them to bypass the agreed forum of dispute resolution. At the cost of repetition it may be stated that in the above discussions we have only indicated some of the circumstances in which the High Court have declined to entertain petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution for enforcement of contractual rights and obligation; the discussions are not intended to be exhaustive. This Court from time to time disapproved of a High Court entertaining a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in matters of enforcement of contrac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the writ petition. 16. In Halsbury's Laws of England, Volume 1, Para 89, the nature of the writ of mandamus is dealt with : 89. Nature of mandamus. The order of mandamus is of a most extensive remedial nature, and is, in form, a command issuing from the High Court of Justice, directed to any person, corporation or inferior tribunal, requiring him or them to do some particular thing therein specified which appertains to his or their office and is in the nature of a public duty. Its purpose is to remedy defects of justice; and accordingly it will issue, to the end that justice may be done, in all cases where there is a specific legal right and no specific legal remedy for enforcing that right; and it may issue in cases where, although there is an alternative legal remedy, yet that mode of redress is less convenient, beneficial and effectual. 17. We do not think it is necessary to deal with the said issue in more details. Mandamus is an accepted and powerful item in the armoury, particularly of High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to strike at injustice and reach justice. It is significant, interesting and in a sense heartening to note that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
