CW-4950/2004 - Tara Ram & Anr. Vs. State & Ors. : order Dt.3.3.08 1/4 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4950/2004 Tara Ram & Anr. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Date of order : 3rd March, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. Rajesh Choudhary for the petitioner. Mr. Ashok Chhangani) for the respondents. Mr. V.K. Mathur ) --------- 1. Heard learned counsel. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court inter alia challenging the agreement Annex.P/19 dated 9.8.2004 awarding the contract of distribution of power bills by Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam to the Post Office. 3. The said agreement was executed between Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. and India Post through Post Master General Rajasthan Western Region on 9th August, 2004 to be effective from 1st September, 2004. 4. The case set up by the petitioner is that the Executive CW-4950/2004 - Tara Ram & Anr. Vs. State & Ors. : order Dt.3.3.08 2/4 Engineer, Jodhpur DISCOM, Barmer by his work order dated 24.8.2004 Annex.P/10 had extended the period of said work which the petitioner was already doing on contract basis for the period September 2004 to January 2005 in rural areas of Sub-Division Balotra. 5. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, a right came to be vested in him on account of said office order Annex.P/10 dated 24.8.2004 and consequently agreement executed between Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. and India Post through Post Master General Rajasthan Western Region Annex.P/19 could not be enforced to the prejudice of the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent JVVNL has filed reply denying the right of petitioner to continue of said work and it has been submitted in the reply that in the larger public interest and on account of better networking, the post office was better suited for the said work of distribution of power bills and there was no legal impediment in the JVVNL to enter into such an agreement with the CW-4950/2004 - Tara Ram & Anr. Vs. State & Ors. : order Dt.3.3.08 3/4 Post Office and, therefore, no valid challenge can be laid to said agreement dated 9th August, 2004. 7. Having heard learned counsel, this Court is of the opinion that by the aforesaid order dated 24.8.2004 Annex.P/10 passed by the learned Executive Engineer, possibly in ignorance of the fact that the Corporation itself has entered into an agreement with Post Office on 9th August, 2004, cannot be said to have vested the petitioner with a right which is irrevocable or which cannot be withdrawn. The fact that the petitioner had not commenced the said work from September 2004 onwards in pursuance of the said work order Annex.P/10 dated 24.8.2004 is also not disputed by the petitioner. 8. However, in the larger public interest, if the Corporation JVVNL found it proper to entrust the said work to the Post Office and had entered into the aforesaid contract with the Post Office for this purpose, in the opinion of this Court, the petitioner is not entitled to pray for quashing of such contract, much less in the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of CW-4950/2004 - Tara Ram & Anr. Vs. State & Ors. : order Dt.3.3.08 4/4 India. If the petitioner is of the view that there was any breach of contract on the part of the JVVNL in withdrawal of said order given to him, the petitioner could avail the remedy by way of civil suit for determination of such civil rights and breach of contract, if any. 9. Consequently, this writ petition is found to be devoid of merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J. item No.14 babulal/-