MANJU AJMERA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHAT is claimed in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India, is writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay a sum of Rs. 14,86,000/- to the petitioner against one bill raised by the petitioner on the State (F. W. D. Department) for certain work done by the petitioner.

(2.) IN my opinion to writ lies no claim such relief but the remedy of petitioner is to file suit in Civil Court or resort to arbitration. It is not a recovery made by the Slate under some law which is declared ultra vires. A writ of mandamus is maintainable only in relation to that money claim which was recovered from the petitioner under the authority of some Act made by State on the Union as the case may be which eventually was declared unconstitutional. It is then such recovery becomes against the authority of law within the meaning of Article 265 of the Constitution. This is now well settled by the decision of Supreme Court in the case reported in A. I. R. 1998 SC 1729.

(3.) THE recovery in question is not under some Act but it is purely a contractual one. The petitioner has done some work for the State and then submitted a bill for the work done. It is this bill which according to petitioner is unpaid. For recovery of this amount, the petitioner has to either file suit or resort to arbitration Tribunal if it is applicable.