9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 1164X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the bills without justification. The relief which is sought in these proceedings is a mandamus to the respondents to make payment of an amount of ` 1,34,71,670/- in respect of the spare parts allegedly supplied by the petitioners to the Central Works Shop of the second respondent during financial years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. At the outset, a preliminary objection was raised by the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents to the maintainability of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. 2. We are of the view that, in a matter of this nature which pertains to alleged non-payment of dues under a contract for supply of goods, it would neith ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o defend the suit. 4. Hence, in the present case, we see no reason or justification to entertain the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. 5. Additionally, it must also be noted that the petitioners had moved an earlier writ petition seeking a mandamus in terms of the very same prayer, namely the prayer for payment of an amount of ` 1,34,71,670/- together with interest at 18% per annum. The earlier writ petition, Misc. Bench No. 6699 of 2013, M/s. Alaska Tech. Through its Partner Sanjeet Singh v. Nagar Nigam, Lucknow and others, was dismissed by the Division Bench on 24 September, 2013 on the ground that a mandamus could be issued only where there is a violation of a statutory duty. Disputed questions of fact can only be adjudic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned Counsel for the Nagar Nigam that manipulation has been done with regard to preparation of bill and Economic Offense Wing has been directed to hold an inquiry. It is submitted that amount in question is also subject-matter of inquiry by the Economic Offence Wing. Keeping in view the arguments advanced and the averments contained in counter-affidavit, no case for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus is made out. Mandamus may be issued by this Court in case, there is some violation of statutory duty followed by statutory rights. Disputed question of fact can be adjudicated only through competent Court in a regular suit or before other statutory forum. It is not for this Court to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13 January, 2014, an order was passed by another Division Bench of this Court in M/s. Super Spares Thru. Prop Tajender Singh Talwar and another v. State of U.P. and 5 others Misc. Bench No. 245 of 2014.. The Division Bench after recording the rival submissions disposed of the petition with the following observations: Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that the admitted amount for which supply has been made and the articles have been accepted by the authorities of the Nagar Nigam, same shall be released at the earliest i.e., 31.3.2014. 10. This order of the Division Bench was set aside by the Supreme Court on 13 March, 2014 in Civil Appeal No. 3890 of 2014, Lucknow Nagar Nigam and others v. M/s. Super Spar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
