M/S Thangavelu Traders And ANR. v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
[CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/161/2021 M/s Thangavelu Traders & another ...
Petitioners Vs.
The Andaman and Nicobar Administration & others ...
Respondents Mrs.Anjili Nag, Advocate ... for the petitioners Mr.Kishna Rao, Advocate ... for the respondents September 20, 2021 [GNC] Item No.5 This is a second round of litigation before this Court. Pursuant to the supply order issued upon the petitioners, the supply was effected but the payment was not released by the authorities. It appears from the record that several writ petitions were taken out including the one being WP No.087 of 2018 for direction upon the Administration to pay the amount together with an interest @ 8% per annum. The said writ petition being WP No.087 of 2018 was disposed of on 21st June, 2018 directing the authorities to make payment of the price of the goods so supplied together with an interest @ 8% per annum. The earlier writ petition filed by the petitioners being WP No.291 of 2018 was disposed of in the light of the order passed in WP No.087 of 2018 and the respondents were directed to pay the dues together with an interest @ 8% per annum within a
period of three months from the date. The writ petitioners have further annexed an order dated September 27, 2018 passed in WP No.234 of 2018 (M/s Cliff Homeo Hall and another Vs. The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others) wherein the identical order was passed. Pursuant to the said direction vide order No.2983 dated 12th January, 2019 the respondent authorities paid the amount to the said M/s Cliff Homeo Hall and another together with an interest @ 8% per annum. The grievance of the petitioners in the instant writ petition is that the petitioners have been discriminated and the authorities are reluctant to comply the order dated November 27, 2018 passed in the earlier writ petition filed by the writ petitioners.
Though Mr.Rao, learned advocate for the Administration submits that the principal amount has already been disbursed to the petitioners but the interest component could not be because of the financial crunch. According to him, the amount was released on that count which does not include the interest and therefore unless the further amount is released the authorities are facing difficulty in disbursement of the amount. I am not impressed with the aforesaid submission for the simple reason that the respondent authorities have paid the interest to another person who stands on a similar footing that of the petitioners. The authorities cannot act in a pick and choose
manner and disburse the amount to someone and spare the other.
Accordingly, the respondent authorities are directed to pay the interest @ 8% per annum in a similar fashion that of the M/s Cliff Homeo Hall and another within a month from date. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. ( Harish Tandon, J. )