VIRENDRA KUMAR, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Ravi Shanker Tiwari, learned counsel for petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the State and Shri Sanjay Bhasin, learned counsel for opposite party No.3.
(2.) This writ petition has been instituted on behalf of petitioner's firm by stating that his firm is dealing with the sale and supply of computers and its peripherals and has some repute in the market. Opposite party No.2 required computers (hardware and software) for its department for the purpose of BPL survey in Uttar Pradesh and related database and other works. Opposite party No.2 contacted opposite party No.3 for the same requirement. Opposite party No.3 made a formal offer on 28.06.2008 to the Department of Rural Development for supply of necessary computers and its peripherals. Price of amount to the tune of Rs. 20,93,909/- was offered. Opposite party No.2 accepted the offer of opposite party No.3 and issued a purchase order on 01.07.2008 requiring opposite party No.3 to supply the hardware and software of computers for several offices under its department. Opposite party No.3 forwarded the said order to IBM which in turn vide its letter of authorisation dated 04.07.2008 communicated to supply the computer peripherals through its authorised and empanelled partner, who is petitioner. On the basis of communication made by IBM the opposite party No.3 placed the order vide its order dated 04.09.2008 to the petitioner, requiring computer peripherals worth Rs. 18,81,150/-. Therefore, petitioner has supplied the entire material within the stipulated time and installed the same as per the requirement of the opposite party No.2. Opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 had received the entire material and it was installed and supplied by the petitioner but no payment has been made to the opposite party No.3 by opposite party Nos. 1 and 2. Opposite party No. 3 has sent bill dated 16.06.2009 to the opposite party No.2 worth Rs. 20,93,909/- which includes institutional charges and VAT. Opposite party No.3 has also sent reminder vide letter dated 07.08.2009. Details of other several reminders sent by opposite party No.3 is mentioned in para-13 of the petition. Reminder dated 01.09.2011 and 03.10.2011 was also addressed to the opposite party No.1. It is also mentioned in the grounds of the petition that Secretary, Government of U.P., vide letter dated 30.04.2013, directed the opposite party No.2 to fix the liability in delaying the payment to the opposite party No.3. Opposite party No.2 vide letter dated 15.10.2013 communicated to the opposite party No.1 for non availability of budget, for payment of amount of Rs. 20,93,909/-, which was due for the petitioner. Secretary, Government of U.P., vide letter dated 02.06.2015 had communicated to the opposite party No.2 that financial accord has been given for payment of said dues. Opposite party No.2 has also provided details of name of Bank and account number, etc., for transfer of amount of Rs. 20,94,000/- sanctioned by the Government. Letter dated 22.08.2015, 01.03.2016 and 29.03.2016 were sent by opposite party No.2 to opposite party No.3.
(3.) In these circumstances, due to non payment of cost of material supplied by petitioner, the petitioner sent a legal notice dated 13.07.2016 through its advocate, requiring the opposite parties to make payment, else face litigation. On these grounds, following reliefs have been sought by the petitioner: "(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2 to reallocate the budget to the tune of Rs. 20,94,000/- as has been done by them earlier vide letter no. 'Sankhya- 608/38-6-15-15(LC)/2013 dated 02.06.2015' for the payment of the price of the computer peripherals supplied to them by the Petitioner through Opposite Party No.3. (ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Opposite Party No.2 to release the said funds upon the receipt of the same through budgetary provision to the tune of Rs. 20,94,000/- in favour of Opposite Party No.3 and further the Opposite Party No.3 may also kindly be directed to pay the same immediately to the petitioner." ;