IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4620 of 2009 Baij Nath Prasad, S/o- Late Maharaj Ram, resident of village-Pupri Bajar, P.O.-Janakpur Road, P.S.-Pupri, District-Sitamarhi. -Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Chief Electoral Officer, Government of Bihar, Mangalas Road, Patna- 15. 3. The Assistant Chief Electoral Officer, Government of Bihar, Mangalas Road, Patna-15. 4. The Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 5. The District Electoral Officer cum District Magistrate, Sitamarhi. 6. The Block Development Officer, Nanpur. -Respondents. ----------- Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Niraj Kumar. Advocates of the State : Mr. R.K. Singh, GP-13. Mr. J.P. Karan. -------------- 03 12.05.2009 The petitioner is a retail dealer in petroleum products and has a Petrol Pump situated at Pupri in the district of Sitamarhi. As is usual, State and State instrumentalities forced Petrol Pump dealers to make supplies for governmental use of petroleum products on credit. When it comes to making payment on some excuse or the other or on some pretext or the other or on some pretence or the other payments are not made. Even when payments are made they are made after several years. In this case substantial supplies were made by the petitioner of petroleum products (petrol and diesel) for Lok Sabha elections of the year 1999 and Assembly elections of the year 1998. Even though, a decade had gone by no one in the State bothered to pay the amount to the petitioner. Let it be noted that petroleum dealers got their supplies on cash payment. They have discharged statutory liability like taxes etc. on - 2 - sale being shown without waiting for payment to be received. Having become fed up of the arbitrariness of governmental action, petitioner filed this writ petition. This Court by interim order dated 13.04.2009, inter alia, held that petitioner will not be obliged to make supply of petroleum products to State on credit for any purpose including election purpose. The State Authorities apparently woke up because of ensuing Lok Sabha elections. Now, counter affidavit has been filed by the Respondent- District Election Officer-cum-District Magistrate, Sitamarhi, in which it is stated that all payments have been made and no payment is due. Petitioner does not dispute this but submits that because of this arbitrary action on part of the Respondents in withholding payment for over 10 years without any just or reasonable cause, petitioner should be compensated. There is no reasonable explanation for this undue delay of 10 years in making payment except stating that the District Authorities were waiting fund allocation. I may also note and hold that under no law for the time being enforced any petroleum dealer is under any obligation at least legal obligation to supply petroleum products to the State or State instrumentalities on credit. Whatever may be the reason, the petitioner who is not doing charity and is in the business of selling petroleum products has suffered. I find, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to interest by way of compensation for delayed payment @ 6% per annum from the time payment was due (supplies made) to the time payment was made. This amount shall be payable to the petitioner within a period of one month - 3 - from the date of production of a copy of this order before the District Election Officer-cum-District Magistrate, Sitamarhi. It shall be open to him to realize the same from any person or authority who was responsible for causing the delay so that State cannot suffer due to fault of his officers. With these directions and observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)