Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/547/2021 on 8 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
ON THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE:
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ K. TIWARI
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 547 of 2021
BETWEEN:
Vinod Khurana ... Petitioner
(By Mr. Narendra Bali, Advocate)
AND:
State of Uttarakhand & others ... Respondents
(By Mr. T.S. Phartiyal, Additional C.S.C.)
JUDGMENT
1. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has
sought following relief:-
(i) a writ or order in the nature of certiorari to
quash the impugned order dated 21.12.2020
issued by respondent no. 3, order dated
21.12.2020 issued by respondent no. 4 and
notice dated 19.09.2020 issued by
respondent no. 3 (contained as Annexure No.
1, 2 & 3 to the writ petition)
(ii) a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding and directing the
respondents to extend the time period of the
permission granted to the petitioner for
flower Farosi at the Ghats of River Gangat in
Haridwar.
(iii) a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding and directing to the
respondent authority to extend the time
period of depositing the remaining amount in
installments with the extended time period of
permission.
2. According to the petitioner, he was the
highest bidder in respect of a contract for selling flower
at bathing Ghat in Haridwar, however, formal contract
was not executed. Since Nagar Nigam Haridwar has
issued recovery certificate under Section 507 of
Municipal Corporation Act, 1959 for recovery of
`60,78,044.50/- against the petitioner, therefore,
petitioner has approached this Court.
3. It is the contention of the petitioner that
since no formal contract was executed between the
petitioner and Nagar Nigam Haridwar, therefore,
petitioner is not liable to pay any amount. It is further
contended that before proceeding under Section 507 of
Municipal Corporation Act, a notice of demand, as
contemplated under Section 506 of Municipal
Corporation Act, has to be issued to the petitioner,
which was not issued to him. He further submits that
on account of lockdown, imposed in view of COVID-19
pandemic, bathing Ghat remained closed for several
months in the year 2020, therefore, petitioner cannot
be asked to pay the contractual dues in respect of those
months.
4. Per contra, Mr. Sandeep Kothari, learned
counsel for Nagar Nigam Haridwar submits that formal
contract could not be executed on account of failure on
the part of the petitioner to furnish requisite stamp
duty, however, according to him, work order was issued
to the petitioner, pursuant to which he started selling
flowers in bathing Ghats. He further submits that
petitioner was issued a notice under Section 506 of
Municipal Corporation Act on 19.09.2020, therefore,
there is no infirmity in the recovery certificate issued on
21.12.2020. He further submits that there is no policy
decision taken by the Government for exempting the
Contractor from paying their contractual dues for the
period of lockdown during COVID-19. He, however,
submits that if petitioner makes representation for
redressal of his grievances, then the Competent
Authority in the Nagar Nigam Haridwar will consider the
same and take appropriate decision, in accordance with
law.
5. In such view of the matter, the writ petition
is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to
approach the Competent Authority in the Nagar
Nigam Haridwar by making representation. If such
representation is made within two weeks from today,
Municipal Commissioner/Competent Authority in the
Nagar Nigam Haridwar shall take decision thereupon,
in accordance with law, as early as possible, but not
later than four weeks from the date of production of
such representation along with certified copy of this
order.
6. For a period of six weeks or till the decision is
taken on petitioner's representation, whichever is
earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the
petitioner.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
Aswal
