VARUN CARRIERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the request of both the learned counsel for the parties the special civil application has itself been heard finally. From the facts to be taken note of hereafter it would appear that a short question arise for determination. The petitioner union was awarded contract work for loading and unloading and transhipment of goods from broad gauge to meter gauge and meter gauge to broad gauge. The contract was to expire on 31.8.1994 which was extended up to 30.9.94 and licence of the petitioner, obtained under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, also came to be cancelled. The petitioners' claim to payment on completion of contract admittedly resulted in a payment due to the petitioners to the tune of Rs.62,22,574.00. According to the averments made in paragraph 2.5 of the reply affidavit, as per the computations shown in Annexure II annexed to the reply affidavit after adjusting amount recoverable from the petitioner against the amount payable to the petitioner amounting to Rs.76,22,757.00, the net amount which the petitioners would be entitled to was stated to be Rs.62,22,574.00. It was clarified in terms of Annexure II that this amount which became payable to the petitioners included security deposits which on completion of contract was refundable to petitioner to the tune of Rs.22,95,300.00, Since the security deposit was satisfied through bank guarantee and not by deposit of actual cash the actual cash amount to which the petitioners were entitled to payment came to Rs.39,27,274.00 as in respect of security deposit only bank guarantees were to be discharged and no actual payment was to be made. Since the respondents General Manager, Western Railway had withheld the payment of said amount for no reason, subject to furnishing of bank guarantee, this petition was filed seeking mandamus to the respondents not to detain the the payment of the amount of Rs.83,17,082.00 alleged to be the admitted dues legally payable to the petitioner.

(2.) In reply affidavit the justification for detaining the admitted sum, and insisting of bank guarantee for Rs.39,27,274.00 was stated to be that the two claim applications Nos. 875 of 1994 and 44 of 1995 have been filed respectively on behalf of 1500 and 450 workmen before the authority under Payment of Wages Act, for a sum totalling to Rs.58,54,047.60. It was also stated that in view of the provisions of the agreement between the parties, the Contractor is bound to give full indemnity towards the payment of dues towards labourers and the railway administration has been given full right to deduct the same from security deposit. It was also stated that the railway administration is ready and willing to release dues of the petitioner against the bank guarantee.

(3.) From the aforesaid averments made in reply affidavit it is apparent that so far amount due to the petitioner is concerned, there is no dispute. There is no dispute about the liability of the Western Railway Administration to make payment to the petitioner in lieu of contract executed by it. It may also be noticed here that on going through the pleadings and the details in Annexure II to the reply affidavit, learned counsel for the petitioner candidly stated that the admitted claim to which this petition can be referable to would come to only Rs.39,27,274.00 as no payment in lieu of bank guarantee need be made to the petitioner nor any amount would become payable in addition to Rs.62,22,574.00 as per the admitted claim in that regard.