IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION NOS.30661-662 OF 2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
M/S. SAGAR TRADERS, PROPRIETORY CONCERN, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT M.G.ROAD, CHIKKABALLAPURA TOWN – 562 101, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI.N.LAKSHMIPATHI, S/O NARASIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI M.S.NAGARAJA, ADV.,) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER, BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE DEPARTMENT, #16D, 3RD FLOOR, DEVARAJURS BHAVAN, VASANTHANAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 052.
3. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, BACKWARD CLASSES & MINORITY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, 1ST MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGAR, TUMAKURU – 572 126.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M.VINOD KUMAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-3 TO CLEAR THE BILLS MADE BY THE PETITIONER UNDER THE BILLS DATED 11.02.2014 & 18.02.2014 VIDE ANNEXURE – B & E AND ETC., THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking for a writ of mandamus directing the third respondent to clear the bills made by the petitioner as per Annexures-‘B’ and ‘E’ dated 11.02.2014 and 18.02.2014 and further direct the third respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner dated 07.06.2016 and 23.08.2016 to clear the bill amount together with appropriate interest by considering the delay in payment of the bills since from 18.02.2014 vide Annexures-‘F’ and ‘G’.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that third respondent has invited tenders to supply essential materials to the backward classes hostels as well as Murarji Residentail Schools under the Tender notification in the month of October 2013. Since the petitioner has become the successful bidder, third respondent accepted the tender submitted by the petitioner and issued the supply order to supply basic requirements materials to the backward classes hostels at Tumakuru District. The petitioner submitted the bills for a sum of Rs.24,83,795/- along with acknowledgment issued by the consigness regarding receipt of materials to the third respondent on 11.02.2014. Again on 18.02.2014, the petitioner has submitted a bill for a sum of Rs.39,55,042/- along with acknowledgements issued by the consignees regarding receipt of materials to the third respondent. The third respondent has not cleared the bills. Therefore, the petitioner has made representation on 07.06.2016 to the third respondent requesting to clear the bills as well as the delay caused in the payment of bills. Subsequently, the petitioner has made another representation on 23.08.2016 to the third respondent requesting to release the amount immediately. Thereafter, the petitioner has sent a legal notice to the third respondent on 30.11.2017 calling upon the third respondent to clear the bills together with interest. The third respondent by the reply dated 19.12.2017 agreed to clear the bills immediately after obtaining Quality Assurance Certificate from the concerned Authority. Inspite of the same, the third respondent has not considered the representation of the petitioner nor cleared the bills. Therefore, petitioner is before this Court for the relief sought for.
3. Learned AGA appearing for the respondents have not filed any objections to the allegations made in the writ petitons.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties to the lis.
5. Sri.M.S.Nagaraja, learned counsel for the petitioner contend that it is not in dispute that the petitioner bid was accepted. Accordingly, the petitioner has supplied the materials to the residential schools at Tumakuru. As per the bill dated 11.02.2014 and 18.02.2014, the third respondent is due for a sum of Rs.24,83,795/- and Rs.39,55,042/- duly acknowledged by the consigness regarding receipt of the materials to the third respondent. Inspite of repeated demand, the third respondent has not cleared the bills. Though the third respondent agreed to clear the bills on 19.12.2017, the same has not been done. Hence, he sought to allow the writ petitions.
6. Per contra, learned Additional Government appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 on instructions submit that there is no dispute with regard to the supply of materials by the petitioner on acceptance of ‘E’ tender bid by the third respondent. He also further submits that the third repsondent is taking steps to clear the bills . He further submits that the third respondent shall consider the representation of the petitioner and clear the bills within a period of two months. The said submission is placed on record.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it is not in dispute that the third repsondent invited tender to supply essentials materials to the backward classes hostels as well as Murarji Residential schools under the Tender notifications in th month of October, 2013. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner has become successful bidder and third respondent accepted the tender submitted by the petitioner and issued the supply order to the petitioner. The petitioner has supplied the materials to the consigness in the month of January 2014 and submitted the bill to the third respondent to clear the bills and pay the amount as per the bill. The third respondent is due in a sum of Rs.24,83,795/- and 39,55,042/-. In the year 2014, inspite of repeated demand and issuance of legal notice, the third respondent has not cleared the bill amount nor considered the representation. Hence, as per the supply order the third respondent ought to have cleared the bills immediately after supply of the material without there being any delay. Therefore, it is the duty of the third respoondent to consider the representation and clear the bills due to the petitioner. In view of the above, the petitioner has made out a prima facie case to issue writ of mandamus as prayed for.
8. In view of the aforesaid reasons, writ petitions are allowed. The third respondent is directed to clear the bills of the petitioner dated 11.02.2014 and 18.02.2014 by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 07.06.2016 and 23.08.2016, if not already considered and disposed off within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order without giving any room for further litigation.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE VMB