^^ \^T THE HIGH •GOURT OF\KJDICATURE OP CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P4C^ ^£33 /20a9 PETITIONER %^1 ?<fi®^ .«•' -ys/^y RESPOMDENTS M/& LaxEFti Eaterprises Through its Partn.er Baoiswaroo^p Kbandelwal, Aged ab&ut 48 year&, S/o Shri Bfaola Shaakar Khandelwal, R/o Shop No.3, C.G.H.B. Sh&ppiag CtMaplex Bha^at Singh Ward Tatibandh, Raipur, Tah S& Distt Raipar (C.G.) VERSLIS . 1. State of Ghhattisgarfa Through : Under Secretaiy, PubMe Works Depactmetit D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) . 2. The Superintendiag Eagineer PubUc Works Department i No.2, Raipur (0.0.) 3. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Departmertt, Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (C.G.) /4. Tbe Sub Divisioiial OfBeer, Publie Works Department, Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OP INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF MAN-DAMUSLCERTIORARY OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIKE NATURE ETC. .--V HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH. BILASPUR DB: HOM'BLEi I.M. QUDDU8I & HON'BLB N.K. AGRAWAL, JJ W.P (Cl No. 6699 of 2009 Vs. APPEARANCE: Mr. Y.C. Sharma, counsel for the Petitioner. Mr. Kishore Bhaduri, AddL Adovcate General for fhe State/Respondents. JUDGMENT (27.07.2010) Per I.M. QUDDUSI 1. The petitioner, who w^ givcn contract for coUection of toll tax at Mahanadi Dongaridih-Kasdol-Ghatmandwa Road and Jonk Nadi Katgi ghat on the baste ofthe amoiint tendered by it, has aggrieved by the decision of the respondents that the for the days for which fhe realization of the toU tax was suspended, the Govenunent will conipensate by calculating the ratio to the tune of amouat tendered by it. He has prayed for quashing of tfae iiapugned orders 18.05.2009, 11.6.2009 and 25.9.2009. 2. Accorduig to fhe contract deed, the period of coUection of toUs at fhe above two place was from 18t April, 2008 to 31st March 2009. However, fhe toU tax recoveiy was suspended duruig the period when the Clihattisgarh people especiaUy PBTmONBK M/s. Laxmi Enterprises RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh and 3 others "•<«. '^ Sfc S »«ia isa-asw Satnami coiniauaities celebrated Giroudpuri Mela that is from 28.2.2009 to 04.03.2009. There is legittmate expectation of eveiy successful bidder that he would eam dtuing the contract period and if fhe penod or part of the period is spent without aay eaming, fhe whole purpose of submittmg the tender inaking fhe bid is finstrated. Therefore, to fuIBU fhe legitimate expectation, it is the duty of the Govemiaent to coasider fhat when di.uiag the period the contract reiaaias suspended, the Govenunent should conrpensate in absence of aay conditions inentioned ia fhc contract deed. In the iastaat case, fhere is no condition in fhe coatract deed that what is fhe aiaouiit as conipensation to be paid by the respondents for aay period the recoveiy of toU tax reinains suspcnded. However, as proposed by fhe petitioner, we are not iuclined to say that whatever is the earuing of the petitioner iu other days, an average should be sorted-out aad the coinpensation should be paid at the same ratio as it is not witfain fhe scope of judicial review of t.his Court. Therefore, the better course woiiM be to explore the possibUity of amicable settlenient betiffeen fhe parties for payment ofcoiapensation or refer the inatter ia accordancc with the contract deed to the concemed authority or the arbitrator, as the case niay be. Therefore, the petitioner may move a representation to the concemed ofEicer aud on inovuig such a representatioa, we hope and expect that soine ainicable settteinent wiU be amved at between the parties for payment of coinpensation Rao during fhe days whea there was suspension of recoveiy of toU tex during the conteact period offhe petitioD.er. 3. We hope aad trust that the same wffl. be niade as early as possible preferably wifhin a period of3 inonfhs fioni the date ofsubmission ofrepresentation alongwifh copy offhis order. 4. Accordiagly, this writ petition staads finaUy disposed of. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K, Agarwal Judge