DIBAKAR SWAIN Vs. CASHEW DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this application challenging the order of forfeiture dated 19.05.1998 vide Annexure-9 passed by the Manager, Land and Administration, Orissa State Cashew Development Corporation Ltd. due to non-deposit of balance amount in respect of Landei Hill Cashew Plantation under the Divisional Manager, Khurda.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case in hand are that opposite party no.1 used to lease out the right of plucking of cashew nuts by tender or negotiation for a particular crop of a particular year. For the year 1997-98 (1998 crops) sealed tenders were invited during the month of January, 1998 and as none applied, the same was cancelled. For second time, when the tender was called, the petitioner deposited Rs.100/-, purchased the tender paper and submitted his tender in a sealed cover along with initial deposit of Rs.1,00,000/- in shape of Bank Draft. As the same was single tender, the same was cancelled. On 3rd occasion, when the tender was called, the petitioner submitted his sealed tender and with regard to initial deposit of Rs.1,00,000/- such sum having already been deposited by him pursuant to earlier tender call, the same was adjusted. On the 3rd occasion, since the tender could not be finalized, the same was accepted through negotiation and it was agreed to give the field to the petitioner for Rs. 2,43,270/- inclusive of tender amount of Rs.2,25,000/-, 5% security amounting to Rs.11,250/- and watchman wages of Rs.7020/-. Since the petitioner had already deposited Rs.1,00,000/-, after adjusting the said amount, he was required to pay the rest amount of Rs.1,43,270/-. The petitioner deposited the said amount of Rs.1,43,270/- on 12.03.1998 and acknowledging the same, a money receipt was granted to him vide Annexure-3. Thereafter, instead of issuing any work order in his favour, again the amount was negotiated in the Board meeting of the opposite parties, and there was an enhancement of the amount by Rs.5000/-. Consequence thereof, tender acceptance order was issued on 6.3.1998 vide Annexure-4 requiring the petitioner to deposit Rs. 1,48,520/- as against the total negotiated amount of Rs. 2,48,520/-. As in the meantime, Rs.1,00,000/- had already been deposited earlier to participate in the tender process and subsequently vide Annexure-3 a sum of Rs.1,43,270/- has already been deposited, thereby as against demand of Rs.2,48,520/- in Annexure-4 the opposite parties acknowledged receipt of Rs.2,43,270/-. Accordingly, balance amount of Rs.5250/- was to be paid by the petitioner towards full and final tender amount. On depositing of the said amount, necessary work order to be issued in favour of the petitioner to operate the cashew field in question. But on 15.03.1998, due to heavy cyclone/tarnado with halestone the Landei Hill Cashew Plantation with its contiguous area and the trees was destroyed and cashew nuts were totally damaged. Therefore, instead of executing the agreement and obtaining the work order, the petitioner had requested opposite party no.1 on 16.03.1998 to refund his money amounting to Rs.2,43,270/- which he had already deposited before opposite party no.1 for such plantation. But the claim of the petitioner was not accepted and on the other hand he was called upon to deposit the balance amount of Rs.5250/- to get the work order after execution of deed of agreement vide letter dated 24.03.1998, Annexure-7. In response to letter dated 24.03.1998, the petitoner by its letter dated 29.03.1998 expressed his desire not to go for any agreement for Landei Hill Cashew Plantation and requested to refund of the amount. Consequent upon that, he was intimated as per Annexure-9 that his entire deposit of Rs.2,43,270/- was forfeited by the authorities, and hence this writ application.

(3.) The opposite parties in their counter affidavit though have acknowledged the factum of receipt of Rs.2,43,270/- by the Corporation from the petitioner submitted that because of proposed settlement of the cashew plantation field in favour of the petitioner in respect of Landei Hill area and also application dated 16.03.1998 vide Annexure-5 petitioner intimating that due to heavy cyclone the said plantation had been damaged and requesting for refund of the amount deposited by him, have stated that as per Clause-4 under the head "General? of the terms and conditions of tender for 1997-98 (98 Crops), no complaint with regard to the damage in any form by any tenderer could be considered after issuance of Acceptance Order. Therefore, the Corporation was not liable to consider the application of the petitioner as per the above terms and conditions of the tenders.