^ HIGM COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DB; Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra & Hon'bleShri R.N. Chandrakar..)J. W.P.(C1 No.7566/2010 Petitioner RESPONDENTS Vs. 1. Amar Singh Yadav S/o. Late Shri Chunnilat Yadav, agecf aboutSO years, R/o. Dhamadha Naka, Sikola Bhata, Durg, distt. Durg (CG) Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Vipadan Sangh Maryadit Raipur Through the lyianaging Director, Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Vipadan Sangh ftteryadit, 880 Civil Lines, 1-leEidQuarter Raipur (CG) The Managing Director, Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Vipadan Sangh Maryadit, SSOCivil Lines, Head Quarter Raipur (CG) The District Marketing Officer, Chhattisflarti Rajya Sahkari Vipadan Sangh Maryadit, Rajnandgaon, Near Purana Vishram Grih, Dewangan Complex, Rajnandgaon (CG) Shri Anand Yadav S/o. Shri Ram Singh Yadav, aged about 33 yeare, Dhamadha Naka, Ward No.15, Durg Q'stt.Durg (CG) Present: Shri Rishi Rahul Soni with ShriJitendra Gupta, counsel for ttie petitioner. ORAL ORDER (05.01.2011) 1. By the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):- 10.1 The Hon'ble COBrt may kindly be pleased to call forentire records pertaining to the caseof thepetitioner for its kind perusal. 10.2 the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant the petitioner suitable compensation against illegal and arbitrary action ofthe respondenf No.t to 3 in canceling the agreement dated 10.12.2009 (AnnexureP-1) 10.3 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the agreemenf which has been ( i Bas ^s.i.sass-,.,^ ^y^ ^ 3. 4. executed by the Sangh in favour of the respondent No.4(under which the respondent No.4 has been awarded work of rack unloading and transportation of Bardana Gathan for the year 2010-2011), and the above said work may kindly beawarded to the petitioner; 10.4 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue suitable writ commanding to_ the respondents to grant the petitioner damages for the work illegaily allotted tothe respondent No.4; 10.5 It is prayed alternative that the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue suitable direction to the respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 19.10.2010 (Annexure-P/4) filed by the petitioner expeditiously within a period ofonemonfh; 5.6 Any other relief(s) which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted. Grievance of the petitioner is that he was awarded work of rack -C (}*-rtu>t-"( t^ unloading and transportation of Bardana ^athan for the period from 01.09.2009 to 30.09.2010 and an agreement of Ex-P/1 was executed, however, during the period of agreement, i.e. in the month of September, tender forthe same have been again ftoated for the year 2010-2011 vide Annxure-P/2 and work of the petitioner was handed over to respondent No.4 w.e.f. 29 September, i.e. when the agreement in favour of the petitioner was in existence. Heard learned counsel forthe petitioner. Indisputably, period under the agreement of Annexure P/1 has already expired on 30 September, 2D10 and arr agreement has been executed by respondents 1 to 3 in favour of respondent No.4 for the year 2010-201 1. In the-icircumstances, retief claimed by the petitioner in the instant petition cannot be granted. Disputed questions of fact arising out of contract agreement are involved and the petitioner can avait the remedies by initiating ..SS^-^f.: ~f:- '/cy ^u •<> appropriate proceedings for recovery of damages and damages cannot be quantified in the writ proceedings as the same wou!d require recording of evidence. The petition is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- DhirendraMishra Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge •M