Ajay Kumar Gupta vs The State of Jharkhand & Anr

Heard counsel for the parties.

Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to direct the

respondents to forthwith determine Agreement No. 10F2-2007-08, entered

into with the respondents for execution of repair and maintenance of a road

Kharka to Kotang via Patgachha having a stretch of 4 Kms. The petitioner

was successful in the NIT and was allotted the work vide letter no. 201 dated

20th February, 2008. He was under stipulation to complete the work by 25 th

March, 2008. Petitioner has, however, made representations before the

respondents raising issues relating to non-completion of the work for

reasons beyond his control such as non-payment of running bills due to non-

availability of funds; non-availability of raw materials and attack by Maoist

Extremists in the area where the work was being executed. Since the

respondents department failed to act as per the request made, petitioner has

been compelled to move this Court.

As per the stand of the respondent State brought on record

through an affidavit filed by respondent no. 4, petitioner has not raised any

such issues regarding payment of advance bill and supply of material before

the Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Organization (Works) Division,

Gumla. Reference has been made to the various clauses of the agreement

in that regard. Counsel for the respondents further submits that repeated

extensions were also granted to the petitioner to complete the work.

Counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the

correspondences undertaken between the Executive Engineer and the

Assistant Engineer of Works Division as also with the Superintending

Engineer of the Rural Works Circle, Ranchi on the question of execution of

the work by the petitioner vide Annexure- 4 and 5, letters dated

18th January, 2010 and 25th January, 2010. It is submitted that the lack of

allotment for execution of the work and payment in lieu thereof is evident

from the bare perusal of the these correspondences.

I have considered the submissions of the parties in the light of the

relevant material facts noticed herein above.

On being asked, learned counsel for the parties have informed

that despite almost eight years of execution of the agreement and the non-

execution of the work for one reason or the other over which parties have

traversed allegations against each other, the agreement has not yet been

determined. There is no reason why the competent authority/ respondent no.

4 would not take a final decision on the question of determination of

Agreement No. 10F2-2007-08 executed with the petitioner in such state of

facts. However, let it be also made clear that this Court has in no way made

any comments on the merits of the allegations between the parties or the

fault or liability of either of them. Accordingly a decision is required to be

taken in that regard by the competent authority/respondent no. 4 within a

period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in which

petitioner if asked to participate shall co-operate. Writ petition stands

disposed of.