M/s. Coramandel Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Another vs City Corporation, Gulbarga and Others

D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.—Writ appeals by the petitioners in W.P. Nos. 80726-27 of 2012, challenging the order dated 16-7-2012, whereby the writ petitions came to be dismissed by a learned single Judge of this Court. Appellants-writ petitioners had questioned certain notice dated 1-2-2012 [Annexure-A to the writ petition], issued by the first respondent City Corporation, Gulbarga to the appellants terminating the contract which the appellants had entered into with the civic body to execute civil work of the value of Rs. 35.07 crores.

While there is no dispute about the delay in the execution of the work, the appellants sought to suggest that it was due to the inability on the part of the respondent-corporation to finalize things and no blame can be placed at their doors. The learned single Judge noticed that the quantum of work executed was only 2% and 98% of the work had been left unattended etc. and opined that while it was open to the writ petitioners to workout their rights and remedies in accordance with law elsewhere, not a fit case to examine in writ jurisdiction, particularly a matter involving contractual relationship.

We declined further adjournment of the case as sought for by the learned counsel for the appellants and have heard the learned counsel.

We find there is absolutely no scope to interfere with the order passed by the learned single Judge, as the learned single Judge cannot be more right than opining that contractual relationships and inter se disputes should be worked out before appropriate forum and not in writ jurisdiction. Contractual rights cannot be enforced in writ jurisdiction, more so when there are disputed facts etc. We find no occasion for interference in the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 4 of the High Court Act, 1961. Reserving liberty to the appellants to workout rights and remedies elsewhere, these appeals are dismissed.