Ranjeet Kumar vs The Union of India (UOI) and Others

This Letters Patent Appeal is against the order of 27 August, 2003 on C.W.J.C. No. 8379 of 2003 : Ranjeet Kumar v. Union of India and Ors.

The contention on behalf of the Petitioner in the writ petition was that by circumstances which were involuntary to him and had been created he was prevented by sufficient cause to submit the tender on or before 30 April, 2003 with the railways administration. The tender was for the consideration of a contract of parking fees of vehicles parked out side Patna Railway Junction.

The petition was dismissed on the ground that the event which may have aggrieved the Petitioner could at best be on 30 April, 2003 and all that the Petitioner could submit on the petition was that he had made a representation on 6 May, 2003. Further, the learned Judge observed that the petition itself had been filed three and a half months after the representation had been made.

The question is whether the learned Judge has committed an error in not granting relief on the petition.

The submission in the writ petition is that the Petitioner had been prevented from submitting his tender by strong arm tactics and terrorisation. The Petitioner complains of criminality. Who did it had not been identified. If strong arm tactics, intimidation and terrorisation prevented the Petitioner from putting in his tender for consideration, then, the Petitioner is virtually complaining of wrongful restraint u/s 339 and criminal intimidation u/s 503 of the Indian Penal Code. He should have instituted a First Information Report straightaway and perhaps that may have been the case of the Petitioner.

The Court does not find any error in the order on the writ petition.

Dismissed.