India Fly Safe Aviation Ltd vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

Mr. V.B.S. Negi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly submits that prayer nos. ‘A’ & ‘B’ have become

infructuous, by efflux of time; therefore, he is not pressing these two prayers. He further submits that now, only prayer no. ‘C’ survives.

After arguing for a while, Mr. V.B.S. Negi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the writ petition may be disposed of

with a direction to Chief Executive Officer, Uttarakhand Civil Aviation Development Authority, Dehradun to consider refund of the performance

security, deposited by the petitioner amounting to Rs. 75,00,000/-, two months’ licence fee amounting to Rs. 2,49,73,548/-, with interest to the

petitioner.

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that petitioner is not to be blamed for not operating heli-service, pursuant to the

contract awarded to him and, it was due to general elections that such service could not be operated, therefore, petitioner is entitled to refund of the

amount deposited by him.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to make representation to Chief

Executive Officer, Uttarakhand Civil Aviation Development Authority, Dehradun, within two weeks from today. If such representation is made within

stipulated time, Chief Executive Officer, Uttarakhand Civil Aviation Development Authority, Dehradun shall look into petitioner’s request and take

appropriate decision, in accordance with law, within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of representation along with certified copy of this order.

Pending Application, if any, also stand disposed of.