K.KALAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP appearing for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner has stated that he is a contractor of forest works. Respondent No.1 invited E-tender applications for carrying out the work of constructing Solid Block Masonry compound wall during 2015-16 in the Bommanahalli Forest Area, Devanahalli, for construction of 0.415 kms. of compound wall for a fixed amount of Rs.14.06 lakhs. The petitioner being the successful bidder in the tender proceedings was issued with the work order dated 08.09.2015 by respondent No.1 to carry out the work of building compound wall located in Nelamangala Range, vide work order dated 08.09.2015. It is stated that the petitioner duly completed the work assigned therein and in spite of the same, respondent No.1 failed to issue the Work Done Certificate and TDS Certificate to the petitioner and also failed to refund the security deposit amount. Hence, representation dated 15.04.2016 was given to respondent No.1. It is further stated that respondent No.1 released a sum of Rs.11,91,747/- and there was a due in a sum of Rs.2,73,253/-. Since several representations made by the petitioner were not responded to and since the balance amount was not released in his favour, he filed W.P. No.14395/2018 [GM-TEN] before this Court and vide Order dated 01.02.2019 the said writ petition was disposed off with a direction that "in case the petitioner submits a fresh representation within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed, then the Deputy Conservator of Forest is directed to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner by a speaking order within a period of four weeks".

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has made a representation dated 07.02.2019 and 15.02.2019 to respondent No.1. However, instead of implementing the order of this Court, respondent No.1 called upon the petitioner to furnish the final bill in respect of the projects though the preparation of final bill was the responsibility of respondent No.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now vide Annexure-'M' i.e., letter dated 30.03.2019/01.04.2019, respondent No.1 has intimated that since the vouchers were not signed by the petitioner in time, the bill amount could not be paid.