SURESH CHANDRA THAKUR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent District Bar Association, Samastipur. The petitioner has filed the writ application seeking a direction on the respondent Nos. 2 and 3, District Bar Association, Samastipur to carry out the deed of agreement dated 20.7.2006 (Annexure-1) entered into between the petitioner and the respondent No. 2 and further for quashing the letters dated 3.3.2009 and 21.4.2009 and a further direction not to interfere with Clause 6 of the deed dated 20.7.2006 as the petitioner never violated or circumvented any of the terms and conditions incorporated in the deed of agreement.

(2.) At the outset a preliminary objection is taken by learned counsel for the Bar Association that the writ application is not maintainable as the respondent Bar Association is neither a State nor an authority to which a writ can be issued with respect to a contractual relationship entered into between the Bar Association and a private contractor.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the writ application is maintainable as the land on which the Bar Association building is situated and with respect to the construction of which the contract was entered between the petitioner and the Bar Association on 20.7.2006, was given to it by the District Court. In support of the same learned counsel relies upon a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Shri Anadi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandasjiswami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust and Others vs. V.R. Rudani and Others, 1989 AIR(SC) 1607 in paragraphs 19 and 20 of which it has been held as follows:--