BAIJ NATH PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has a retail petroleum outlet at Pupri in the district of Sitamarhi. On instruction of the Subdivisional Officer and on basis of coupon issued from the office of the Subdivisional Officer, Pupri, the petitioner was required to supply fuel for government vehicles and generator. Petitioner on basis of the said coupon then used to submit the bills for payment but problem start then. For payment, petitioner is required to run from pillar to post and for years petitioner's payments are not made on one pretext or the other. In the present case similar is the situation.

(2.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Collector, Sitamarhi and the Subdivisional Officer, Pupri ,District -Sitamarhi, in which the entire dues of the petitioner to the extent of Rs. 2,42,065/ - is admitted. The only execuse that is given is that the district authorities are in correspondence with the various departments for allotment of fund and on receipt thereof the payment would be paid. There is absolutely no dispute as to the liability of the State to make payment. In my view, the stand of the respondents is per se arbitrary. The State cannot say that I will take supply today and will make payment as and when I feel like. Under the provisions of Sales of Goods Act the obligation unless otherwise specifically agreed is simultaneous. It is simultaneous with delivery of goods and cannot be postponed. The matter had been examined by this Court in the case of Vishnu Sugar Mills v. Food Corporation of India and Ors. since reported in 1986 PLJR 1045. This Court asked the petitioner that the petitioner and their like should have stopped supply to the State and State Department if payment was not forth coming. Petitioner rightly submitted that the State and the State officials are not only the licensing authorities but enforcement officers also they would be consequently under serious threat if they took such an action. However, this Court would not go into this aspect of the matter.

(3.) THE authorities will not coerce the petitioner and their like to make delivery without cash payment.