9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red the highest amount, this court is of the view that both the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed and accordingly, they are dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondents to renew every year provided the licencee pays 10 per cent over and above the previous year licence amount with sales tax and surcharge, whereas, in this case, as per the tender conditions, the petitioner was directed to pay 25 per cent of the tender amount on or before August 24, 2006 which was paid by him, but the balance 75 per cent of the amount, i.e., Rs. 4,05,520 payable on or before December 4, 2006 was not paid within the stipulated period, but he paid only a sum of Rs. 3,40,000 that too on instalments as mentioned below: (i) 29.12.2006 . . . Rs. 1,00,000 (ii) 14.02.2007 . . . Rs. 85,000 (iii) 21.02.2007 . . . Rs. 15,000 (iv) 23.03.2007 . . . Rs. 50,000 (v) 29.03.2007 . . . Rs. 83,000 (vi) 17.06.2007 It is further stated by the learned Special Government Pleader that the above said payments belatedly made by the petitioner show that he failed to comply with the conditions of licence contemplated in the tender notification dated July 11, 2006. In any event, the petitioner is not entitled for renewal since the licence period was confined only for one year from July 1, . . . Rs. 7, 000 Rs. 3,40,000 2006 to June 30, 2007 and the same also e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amount every year and the five years mentioned therein permit the authorities to grant maximum period of lease. Once lease is granted for one year after compliance of necessary formalities, which is one of the essential conditions of tender, it cannot be altered by the parties after entering into the arena. The remedy under article 226 of the Constitution of India will not be available to enforce a contract qua contract. The High Court in its extraordinary jurisdiction normally cannot entertain a petition filed against a commercial contract except in cases where the authorities arbitrarily exercising their discretion for giving contracts at their sweet will and pleasure or there is violation of terms and conditions laid down in the tender notice or act unreasonably or contrary to the public interest or adopt unfair or secret procedures, etc. Indeed, the powers of the High Court can be invoked for enforcement of fundamental rights or other legal rights, but will not apply to mere contractual rights. The honourable Supreme Court in the below mentioned decisions laid down various principles in respect of commercial transaction: (i) Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fourth respondent was, in the circumstances invalid as being violative of the equality clause of the Constitution as also of the rule of administrative law inhibiting arbitrary action." (ii) Monarch Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner, Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation AIR 2000 SC 2272 wherein in para 12, it was held thus: "12. . . . The High Court had taken the view that if a term of the tender having been deleted after the players entered into the arena it is like changing the rules of the game after it had began and, therefore, if the Government or the Municipal Corporation was free to alter the conditions fresh process of tender was the only alternative permissible. Therefore, we find that the course adopted by the High Court in the circumstances is justified because by reason of deletion of a particular condition the wider net will be permissible and a larger participation or more attractive bids could be offered. " It is clear from the above said decisions that the High Court shall not adopt any generous and casual approach in applying the right to livelihood under article 21 of the Constitution of India to a case involving contractual dispute. In this c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
