Srinagar, Jan 02 : The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that J&K Cricket Association (JKCA) is amenable to writ jurisdiction of the Court in matters that fall within the ambit of public law acts, but no mandamus can be issued against JKCA in respect of the acts which fall in the sphere of private law.
The court noted that while a private body like JKCA would be amenable to writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution but the judicial review of its actions by the High Court would be confined to only those actions which have the element of public duty and its actions which have the character of private law rights are not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.
The single bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar passed the rulings in a plea filed by M/S Aisha Constructions seeking release of withheld liability to the tune of Rs.6.00 crores in its favour for the construction works executed by the petitioner towards JKCA.
While denying its liability to pay any amount to the petitioner, the counsel representing the JKCA contended that JKCA is a “society” and not a “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, as such, the writ petition against it is “not maintainable.”
The counsel submitted that even if a writ petition would lie against JKCA, but no mandamus can be issued against it for enforcement of private law rights.
Justice Dhar while upholding the objection to the maintainability of the writ petition raised by the respondents, held that the petition is “not maintainable.”
“Therefore, without commenting upon the merits of the case and without commenting on the issue whether the claim of the petitioner is barred by limitation, the instant writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to work out its remedy, as may be available to it under law,” the bench said.
Dismissing a plea, the bench relied on various judgments including the one delivered by the Coordinate Bench of J&K High Court in the case of Showkat Ahmad Rather & Ors. vs. Government of J&K
& Ors. wherein it was held that in the absence of violation of statutory provision or breach of public duty by a body or person, writ petition for enforcement of private contract of service is not maintainable.
Justice Dhar noted that the petitioner is seeking enforcement of a contractual obligation of JKCA which falls within the realm of private law.
“It is not a case where the petitioner is seeking enforcement of any obligation against respondent No.1 which constitutes a public duty or public function of the said respondent, but it is a case where the petitioner is seeking enforcement of a contractual obligation which is purely a private matter between the petitioner and
respondent No.1 (JKCA),” the court said.
Adding, “Therefore, in the light of the law discussed hereinbefore, no mandamus would lie against respondent No.1 to enforce such an obligation.”
