SURENDRA PRASAD Vs. OIL AND NATURAL GAS COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The jurisdiction of the writ Courts in regard to the enforcement of an equity is the principal issue for consideration in this writ petition.

(2.) The petitioner being a Transport Contractor responded to a tender notice by the Oil and Natural Gas Commission for transportation and handling of drilling equipment's. By a letter dt. 25th Jan. 1977 the Commission intimated the petitioner about the acceptance of this tender subject of course to a formal agreement being executed. The Commission, however, even prior to this execution of the formal agreement issued divers Work Orders and directed the petitioner to carry out the same and the petitioner in turn also carried out the work in accordance therewith. On 25th Feb. 1977 the formal agreement was executed being effective from 25th Feb. 1977 to 24th Jan. 1978 subject to further extension. The petitioner contended that in terms of Cl.14 of the agreement, the petitioner was entitled to charge on the basis of volumetric conversion, that is, on the basis of weight per measurement or on the basis of dead weight, that is actual weight of the goods carried whichever was more. The petitioner further contended that inadvertently bills were submitted on the basis of actual weight though in fact the petitioner was entitled to raise and submit bills on the basis of weight by measurement, by reason wherefor the petitioner, on detection of such an error, submitted revised bills. From the records, it appears however, that the respondent did not make any payment in regard to the revised bill.

(3.) Subsequently, however, a further agreement was entered into by and between the petitioner and the respondent commission as regards the entitlement of the petitioner.