TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1776X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate that the respondent give a proper hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass a reasoned order - Present writ petition would be treated as a representation of the petitioner to the Commissioner, SDMC. Petition disposed off. - W.P.(C) 12483/2019 - - - Dated:- 26-11-2019 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH For the Appellant : Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Mr.Mukul Rohatgi and Mr.Sachin Datta, Sr. Advs. with Mr.Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Mr.Roahn Jaitley, Mr. Shushant Sarkar and Mr. Akshay Sharma, Advs. For the Respondent : Mr.Gaurab Banerji, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Harsha Peechara, SC, SDMC with Mr.Raka Chaterjee, Mr.S.P. Mukherjee, Ms.Ishita Mishra and Mr. Mohit Pandey, Advs. ORDER JAYANT NATH, J. (Oral) CM APPL. No. 50934/2019 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 12483/2019 and CM APPL. No.50933/2019 1. This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:- a. Issuance a suitable writ, order and direction declaring that in the guise of section 113 (2) (g) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 the petitioner cannot be compelled to pay to the respondent no. l more than the actual amount collected towards toll ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... week. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Eastern Peripheral Expressway was opened for general public traffic on 27.05.2018. On 16.01.2019, a meeting of a High Level Committee of the respondent took place. In the said meeting, they deliberated that the traffic entering Delhi has reduced due to opening of the Eastern peripheral Expressway. It was estimated in the meeting that was held on 31.08.2018 amongst SDMC, NHAI and the petitioner that on opening of the Eastern Peripheral Expressway there is a reduction of 30% in the commercial traffic approximately and it would be higher on the completion of the Western Peripheral Expressway. The grievance of the petitioner is that at present weekly expected revenue from 124 entry points is only Rs.19.25 crores taking into consideration all other aspects. On the annual basis collection of amount calculated on the basis of survey report is approximately Rs.1000crores which is far below the awarded contract of Rs.1206 crores per annum. 5. It is the case of the petitioner that they have been regularly sending representations to the respondent with regard to decline in toll revenue due to diversion of traffic from 01.06.2018. On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the bid was Rs.636 crores but the petitioner themselves made a bid of Rs. 1206 crores per annum. The second highest bid was of the bidder whose bid was at Rs. 811 crores. Meaning thereby, the petitioner themselves had made a much higher bid in an effort to grab the contract in question. (ii) He further submits that in case toll tax is collected is higher than the petitioner s bid offer, the balance would be retained by the petitioner with themselves and would not be handed over to the respondent. Hence, he states that it was for the petitioner to have properly judged the possible revenue collection and made a bid accordingly. (iii) He further states that presently, a total amount of Rs.450 crores is outstanding whereas the respondent have only a bank guarantee of Rs. 64 crores and some post dated cheques as a security. 9. Given the nature of submissions made, this writ petition can be disposed of at this stage. 10. I may note that the dispute resolution clause in the agreement between the parties reads as follows: 16. Dispute Resolution Clause:- 16.1 Except where otherwise provided in the agreement, all questions and disputes in any way arising out of or relati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he rule cannot be sacrificed at the altar of administrative convenience or celerity; for, convenience and justice - as Lord Atkin felicitously put it - are often not on speaking terms [General Medical Council v. Spackman, 1943 AC 627, 638] . xxxxx 94. The further question to be considered is: What is the effect of the non-observance of this fundamental principle of fair play? Does the non-observance of the audi alteram partem rule, which in the quest of justice under the rule of law, has been considered universally and most spontaneously acceptable principle, render an administrative decision having civil consequences, void or voidable? In England, the outfall from the watershed decision, Ridge v. Baldwin [1964 AC 40 : (1963) 2 All ER 66 (HL)] brought with it a rash of conflicting opinion on this point. The majority of the House of Lords in Ridge v. Baldwin [(1978) 1 SCC 248] held that the non-observance of this principle, had rendered the dismissal of the Chief Constable void. The rationale of the majority view is that where there is a duty to act fairly, just like the duty to act reasonably, it has to be enforced as an implied statutory requirement, so that failure to o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Commissioner would thereafter pass a reasoned order. This exercise may be done within two months from today. (iv) The Commissioner/nominee of the Commissioner is requested to pass a reasoned order uninfluenced by any observations that have been made by this court while passing this order. Once the order is passed, the respondent is free to take steps as per law. Needless to add, in case the petitioner are not satisfied with the said order, they are at liberty to take steps to challenge the same as per law. (v) In the meantime, the petitioner shall continue to pay a sum of Rs.20crores per week starting from the current week. In case there are two consecutive defaults in making payment, the right of the petitioner to a hearing and reasoned order shall stand superseded. (vi) Demand notice dated 18.11.2019 is kept in abeyance subject to speaking order passed by the Commissioner/Nominee of the Commissioner. 15. It has been pointed out that certain post dated cheques that were given by the petitioner are expiring in the next two months. The petitioner will ensure that fresh post dated cheques are given to the respondent with the same validity as was given earlier. 16. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
