IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA No. 2019 of 2007()
1. K.A.NAUSHAD, S/O. K.M.ABDUL KHADER,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA
... Respondent
2. THE ZONAL MANAGER,
3. THE SENIOR REGIONAL MANAGER,
4. THE DISTRICT MANAGER,
5. THE DISTRICT MANAGER,
For Petitioner :SRI.GEORGE JACOB (JOSE)
For Respondent :SRI.JACOB VARGHESE SC FOR FCI
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :10/09/2007
O R D E R
H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.T. SANKARAN, J.
...................................................................................
W.A. No. 2019 OF 2007
...................................................................................
Dated this the 10th September, 2007
J U D G M E N T
H.L. Dattu, C.J.:
The petitioner is a contractor. The first respondent is an authority as
envisaged under Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
2. In the Original Petition filed, the petitioner primarily called in
question the demand raised by the respondents for the loss sustained by the
Food Corporation of India for loss of goods in transit in excess of permissible
limits. This demand was disputed by the petitioner. The said disputed
demand was the subject matter of the Original Petition.
3. Since there was a dispute between the parties with regard to the
loss sustained by the Food Corporation of India, in our opinion, it would have
been appropriate for the learned Single Judge to have relegated the parties
to the civil court for appropriate reliefs. Instead of doing so, the learned single
Judge has disposed of the Original Petition on merits. Aggrieved by the said
order, the petitioner is before us in this Writ Appeal.
4. A Writ is maintainable before this court if it is filed against an order
of demand made by an authority as envisaged under Article 12 of the
Constitution of India, provided that the demand so made is not in dispute. In
the instant case, as we have noticed, the Food Corporation of India is
demanding the so called loss sustained by them while transportation of the
goods by the petitioner-contractor. Since there is a dispute, that dispute can
W.A. No. 2019 OF 2007
2
be resolved only in a civil suit that may be filed by the petitioner. Therefore, in
our opinion, the learned single Judge ought not to have interfered with the
demand raised by the respondents, but should have relegated the petitioner
to file an appropriate civil suit for appropriate reliefs. In that view of the matter,
the following:
O R D E R
I) The Writ Appeal is disposed of.
ii) The appellant/petitioner is now permitted to file a civil suit for
appropriate reliefs, if for any reason, he is disputing the demand raised by the
Food Corporation of India.
iii) If such a civil suit is filed, the civil court shall decide the lis
between the parties without reference to the orders passed by the learned
single Judge.
Ordered accordingly.
H.L. DATTU,
CHIEF JUSTICE.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
lk