ARPIT HEIGHTS P LTD Vs. INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall govern disposal of Writ Appeal No. 568/2012 (Indore Development Authority v. M/s. S.V. Constructions and another), Writ Appeal No. 642/2012 (M.P. Power Transmission Co. Ltd. v. M/s. S.V. Constructions and another), Writ Petition No. 9583/2012 (M/s. P.D. Agrawal Infrastructure Ltd. v. The State of M.P. and others), Writ Petition No. 9584/2012 (M/s. P.D. Agrawal v. The State of M.P. and others), and Writ Petition No. 10910/2012 (Himmat Singh v. The State of M.P. and others), as identical question of law is raised in all these six cases. For the convenience, facts are taken from Writ Appeal No. 357/2012. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 13.7.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1745/2012, this intra-Court appeal has been filed by the appellant-writ petitioner.

(2.) The appellant-writ petitioner is a registered contractor. It carried out various construction works allotted to it and had submitted final bills to the respondent-IDA for making payment. The respondent-ID A insisted the writ petitioner to produce the Royalty Clearance Certificate. Feeling aggrieved, the aforesaid writ petition was filed.

(3.) The writ petitioner's case was that in view of the clear legal position settled by various judgments of the Division Bench and the Single Bench, including the judgment in the cases of M.P. Contractors Sangh, Indore and others v. State of M.P. and another, 1987 JabLJ 743, M.P. Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam v. Abrar Construction Company and others,2005 ArbWLJ 379 (M.P.)], Keti Construction Limited v. State of M.P., 2007 3 MPHT 433 (DB)], and Tomar Construction Company v. State of M.P. and others, 2008 2 MPLJ 40, the respondent had no right to insist upon the petitioner for production of Royalty Clearance Certificate for making the payment of its bills.