The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.22163 of 2014 Dated 11.12.2014 Between:
The Rehabilitants’ Pulverizing Mill Owners’ Welfare Association, APMDC Danger Zone, rep. by its President Galla Srinivasulu …Petitioner And The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Secretary, Industries & Mines Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 2 others.
…Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.L.J.Veera Reddy Counsel for respondent No.1: AGP for Mines & Geology Counsel for respondent Nos.2 & 3: Mr.V.Subrahmanyam, Corporation The Court made the following:
Order:
SC for This Writ Petition is filed with the grievance that respondent No.2- Corporation has not been supplying eight months quota of ‘A’ & ‘B’ grade barytes as per the agreement entered into by it with the members of the petitioner- Association.
Respondent No.3 has filed a counter-affidavit on behalf of respondent No.2- Corporation and himself. In the counter-affidavit, respondent No.3 has not disputed the fact that, on the basis of the agreement entered into with the members of the petitioner-association, respondent No.2 has agreed to sell ‘A’ & ‘B’ grade barytes of certain quantities. He has also not disputed the fact that the advance amount towards the value of the barytes was collected from them. He has further stated that in view of acute shortage of barytes due to fall in production, they are unable to honour the commitments under the agreement.
At the hearing, Mr.V.Subrahmanyam, learned Standing Counsel for the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Limited (for short ‘the Corporation’), on instructions, submitted that as his clients i.e., respondent Nos.2 and 3 are unable to supply barytes to the members of the petitioner-
association, they will refund the advance amount received from them together with the bank rate of interest. He has further submitted that as the bank accounts of the Corporation were frozen following the division of the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh, they are, at present, unable to refund the said money and that as and when the accounts are de-frozen, such payments will be made.
Mr.L.J.Veera Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner- Association, submitted that the members of the petitioner- association will suffer serious prejudice, if respondent No.2- Corporation backs out from their agreement.
The dispute in this Writ Petition arises under a concluded contract. Since respondent No.2 has expressed its inability to supply barytes as per the terms of the agreement, it is not possible for this Court to adjudicate such a dispute in this Writ Petition. Since respondent No.2 has offered to refund the advance amount paid by the members of the petitioner- association along with the bank rate of interest, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition, however, without prejudice to the rights of the members of the petitioner-
Association to seek enforcement of the agreement by availing the common law remedy before the competent Court of civil jurisdiction. The members of the petitioner- Association are also entitled to claim damages for breach of contract and their acceptance of advance money together with the bank rate of interest from respondent No.2 shall not waive their right to institute such proceedings.
The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of by placing on record the undertaking given by the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2- Corporation that as and when the bank accounts are de-frozen, respondent No.2 will return the amounts paid by the members of the petitioner- Association along with the bank rate of interest.
As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.27788 of 2014, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.
(C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J)
Dt: 11th December, 2014
LUR