onoa Writ Petitian No. 293? /200 1 fiq hed Saue Am, S/a ae aout e. R/o Teba Chouk{alapara. Bilasur State of Chhattisgarh Throug: epartment o I ‘ HeLatth ‘$éfvices, >5ecretaryi ealth’ Department, Dy.,K.Bhafvian. p Bapal. " 2. Civil Surgeon cum Cie edical- Oficer. Sardar Patel Chikitsalaya. Bilaspur. 3 . Collector , Bilaspur WRIT PETITION .Ul‘DER ARTICLE 226(227 OF;THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR issUANcE OF A WRIT OF MAWAMUS: ‘CERTIORARI‘ PROHIBITIO I ANDIOR ANY Om SUITAB’IE WRiTi ORDE OR gacfxon To no UUSTICE . amoucoauannqga gd b yars "1‘ g. ‘ i h D f n , H hf M f " . N R g r pa‘ri‘rioner. Shri Gau’ram Bhuduri for fhe respondents Heard. The fenders were subrn ffed. The Tender papers were opened. However, before fhe acceptance was communicmed f0 ‘rhe wrif pefi‘l’ioner, fhe pe'ri‘rioner declin d +0 accep‘l’ any confrac‘r as a resuH' of fhe said Tender. The pefi‘ri ner had deposifed an earnesf money of Rs. 40,000l- and secur ‘ money‘uf Rs. 40,000/— TogeTher wi ‘1 1,900/-. IT is sTaTed ThaT There is n condiTion in The Tender noTice ‘ as regards forfeiTure of The ear esT money and The securiTy deposi'r e'rc. {‘i1%?fa& amounf of Rs; 1,900i—. I‘r is ’ shred by Shri Jaiswal 'rhaf subse’ uen‘Hy fhe confracf has been ‘ alloTfed To a Third person. The said conTracTor has already deposiTed a sum of Rs. 45,000/- as he firsT insTalmenT. Hence The 1 conTracT wark is being carried ouT y The said Third person. The peTiTioner has approached This Cou T by ‘filing The wriT peTiTion under ArTicle 226 of The ConsTiTuTi n of India seeking a direcTion ; To be issued To The respondenTs To refund The aforesaid earnesT 'The securi'fy amount of Rs. i ? XI-Hc.22 m m W....QA.$§> am 31mm WW WWW mm 5 13.12.2001 z 5hri Pmshanf Jaiswa learned .counsel for- The aWW<W) WW§f§€rfW mwmmm $Wwm am: m ‘ WW J" Shri Jaiswal submits ‘rha‘r fhis kind of an ac‘r of fhe S1'a1'e surely aTfracfs The app ‘ica'rion of exercise of power of This Cour? under Ar'l'icle 226 of 1+e Consfi‘ru‘rion of India. As againsf this Shri Gau'mm Bhqdurir sub 'nH's ‘l'ha‘r *he muffer rekrfesLm‘ a con'rmcf. The remedy sough‘l’ for in fhis pe‘ri‘rion is as regards refund of fhe earnest monev and also fhe securi‘ty amounf deposifed by ‘rhe wri‘r peTiTioner- for me purpose oftsecuring some work by submi‘r‘ring fender papers. I'r is sfa‘red by Shri Bhaduri i'i'haf fhe‘ remedy clearly lies before a compei'eni' civil Courf and noT before This Cour‘i'. On perusal of ‘rhe ermen‘rs of fhis pefi'rion and offer hearing counsel appearing for 01h 1he sides, I am of ‘ihe opinion Tho'r 1he ma‘rfer a1' issue has arisen out of a pure and simple confracf work. The remedy sou hf for is also/as regards refund of earnesf money and securi‘ry ni“. In such a si‘iuoi'ion I‘r‘rn nof inclined To hold fhaf fhe wr pe‘ri‘rioner is entifled fo have a remedy from This Courf in exe cise of exfra ordinary jurisdicfi under Arficle 226 of fhe Cons i‘l'ufionm of India. In my view, The remedy lies beforea compefenf u'rhori'fy ¢ In The resul'r fhis p fi'rion is rejec'red. Cerfified copy as p r rules. 7 sd]- it x chief Jusu'ce v a u i o