M/S. Excel Communications (P) Ltd. And ... vs Indian Institute Of Technology on 31 July, 2015

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

M/S. Excel Communications (P) Ltd. And ... vs Indian Institute Of Technology on 31 July, 2015

Bench: Joymalya Bagchi

                                                        1



  S/L. 24
July 31, 2015.
  Ct. no. 28
     ss.                                      W.P. 27539 (W) of 2014

                                   M/s. Excel Communications (P) Ltd. and Anr.
                                                         Vs.
                               Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur and Ors.


                             Mr. Prasanta Kumar Bagchi                   ...for the petitioners.
                             Mr. R.N. Majumdar,
                             Mr. Sourav Chakraborty,
                             Mr. Supratim Bhattacharyya                ...for the respondents.

The petitioner no.1 is a company who rendered cable television services to the respondent no.1, Institute. It is submitted that the contract of the petitioners was illegally terminated and even during subsistence of the said contract, the respondent/Institute has surreptitiously availed of the services of another cable operator which, in fact, was in violation of the terms of the said contract and caused damages to the petitioner.

Over such issues the petitioners had approached this Court earlier by filing a writ petition being W.P. 2639 (W) of 2012, wherein this Court directed the respondent no. 4, Director of the Institute to deal with the grievance of the petitioner. Pursuant to such direction, it appears that respondent no.4 after giving an opportunity of hearing by an order dated 4th June, 2012 turned down the claims of the petitioner, and upheld the claims of the respondent institute with regard to outstanding charges from the petitioner to the tune of Rs. 2,19,184/- (Rupees two lakh nineteen thousand one hundred and eighty four) only. Thereafter, the petitioner was evicted from the premises and he unsuccessfully approached the Civil Court over such eviction.

Finally, the petitioner made another representation to the respondent authority seeking recall of the order dated 04.06.2012.

After a lapse of two years, the present writ petition has been filed assailing the decision dated 04.06.2012 of the respondent no.4, Director.

I am of the view that this writ petition ought to be dismissed only on the ground of delay alone. Be that as it may, I have gone through the order dated 04.06.2012 wherein I find that all contentions of the petitioner were duly addressed and by passing a reasoned decision the claim of the respondent authority with regard to outstanding dues payable by the petitioner has been found to be justified.

I am not willing to substitute such factual findings in judicial review. In the event, the petitioner is of the opinion that termination of contract was wrongful or any other action of the respondent Institute has caused loss or damages, he is at liberty to seek relief in the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Let Photostat certified copy of this order be given to the parties, if applied for, on urgent basis.

(Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)