M/S Hindustan Supply Agency v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration And ORS.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...
WPA/243/2022 M/s Hindustan Supply Agency ... Petitioners Vs.
The Andaman and Nicobar Administration and others ... Respondents Mr. S. Samanta ... for the petitioners Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty Mr. Ramendu Agarwal ... for the respondents July 28, 2022 [SR] Item No.2 Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents require some time to file an affidavit-inopposition to controvert the facts alleged in the writ petition, in particular the quantum, if any, which is actually payable to the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite several orders of this Court, lastly the Division Bench order dated March 5, 2019 passed in MA/011/2019, setting aside the earlier rejection of the Chief Secretary, and remanding the matter back for fresh consideration, the Chief Secretary, instead of reconsidering the amount payable, if any, again postponed the payment on the ground that a disciplinary proceeding is pending against an officer of the respondent authorities on the score of the self-same purchase. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the compass of the writ petition is limited. In view of the specific direction dated March 5, 2019 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in MA/011/2019, remanding the matter to the Chief Secretary for consideration afresh and passing of a fresh order after giving
an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorized representative within six weeks, the Chief Secretary has failed to adhere to the same in strict terms and has postponed the payment on the self-same ground that is pendency of the disciplinary proceeding, which was set aside on the earlier occasion by the Division Bench. In view of the order hereby proposed to be passed, a direction for filing of affidavits is not being passed, since factual exchange of affidavits might prejudice the Chief Secretary, if the matter is remanded back to the Chief Secretary, while deciding the issue finally.
Hence, WPA/243/2022 is disposed of by directing the Chief Secretary, Andaman and Nicobar Administration (respondent no.2 herein) to decide the actual dues of the petitioner at the earliest, in terms of the order dated March 5, 2019 passed by the Division Bench in MA/011/2019 within a further period of eight weeks from date and to disburse the amount, if payable, to the petitioner immediately thereafter.
It is made clear that the claim of the petitioner on merits have not been decided by this Court due to the limited scope of a writ petition and in view of the tenor of the order dated March 5, 2019 passed by the Division Bench, since fixing the said amount at this premature stage would sabotage the remand unnecessarily.
It is made clear that the time-line given in the present order is mandatory. It is expected that the Chief Secretary shall not repeat the ground pendency of the disciplinary proceeding alone for further postponing the matter and to decide the actual assessed amount of dues of the petitioner within the time-frame as given above.
The impugned order of the Chief Secretary bearing Order No.1644 dated June 13, 2019 is accordingly set aside in the light of the above observations.
It is further reiterated that all questions are left open to be argued by the parties, if necessary, before the Chief Secretary at the fresh hearing.
No order as to costs.
Urgency photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the respective parties upon compliance of usual formalities.
( Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J. )