DEORIS MARBANIANG Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner calls upon this Court to issue a writ of mandamus directing the State-respondents to pay to him a sum of Rs. 2,19,28,031/- (Rupees two crores nineteen lakhs twenty-eight thousand and thirty-one) only with interest @ 12 per annum till realization.

(2.) The facts which prompted the petitioner to file the writ petition may be noticed at the outset. The petitioner is the proprietor of the firm under the name and style of "M/s. Fonnya Sports", which is situate at Nichols Roy's building at G.S. Road, Shillong, is dealing with sports goods and is approved by the State-respondents for supplying sports goods to them. The State-respondents, on behalf of the Sports Department and sometimes some Non-Government Organizations, would periodically place demand for supply of sports goods by way of indent and the petitioner would supply the same to encourage sporting activities among the youths of the State, the payments for which would be made on submissions of the bills. But lately, her bills were not paid regularly in spite of her demands and as result thereof, the unpaid amounts accumulated to Rs. 2,19,28,031/-. Initially, the respondents used to clear the bills of the petitioner in every financial year but this system of regular payment came to a halt since June, 2000; they started to make periodical part payments with the resultant huge backlogs. The non-clearance of this huge backlog has caused immense financial problems to the petitioner as major portion of its capital remaining blocked with the respondents. In the last financial year, it was given to understand by the officials of the respondents that all its pending bills would be cleared after the budget for 2003-04 was passed, but, instead of clearing the pending bills, they stopped placing orders altogether except on a few occasions. It is the case of the petitioner that there is no dispute whatsoever in respect of the aforesaid outstanding dues which can create the problem of payment and that it has the legitimate expectation that the respondents would keep their commitment and clear their outstanding liabilities. When the respondents failed to honor their commitment, it approached this Court in WP(C) No. 168 (SH) of 2003 for directing them to pay its pending bills amounting to Rs. 2,19,28,031/-. According to the petitioner, during the pendency of the writ petition, the respondents admitted their liability to the extent of Rs. 1,15,44,930/- (Rupees one crore fifteen lakhs forty-four thousand nine hundred and thirty) only, and on the basis of this admission, this Court disposed of the writ petition by directing them to pay the admitted amount within a period of four months. However, the respondents, contrary to the clear-cut direction of this Court, paid only a sum of Rs. 47 lakhs in three instalments while refusing to pay the balance amount. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner initiated this second round of litigation.

(3.) The writ petition is opposed by the State-respondents, who have now filed their affidavit-in-opposition. The answering respondents do admit that: