ADINARAYAN SHETTY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner who is a senior citizen and a resident of Koramangala has filed this petition as Public Interest Litigation, in which a writ of certiorari has been sought to quash the tender issued by the Commissioner, BBMP for construction of elevated corridor between Ejipura Main Road and Cambridge South Junction, Koramangala. The petitioner in addition seeks a writ of mandamus to respondent Nos.1 to 3 to appoint a committee of experts to assess the loss and damages caused due to delay in completion of the aforesaid project.

(2.) A bench of this court had passed an order on 17/2/2022 by which BBMP was directed to initiate criminal proceedings including lodging of First Information Report against respondent No.4 for misappropriation of funds and to take an action for cancellation of the contract. However, it is pertinent to note that the aforesaid directions, which are mandatory in nature were issued in absence of respondent No.4.

(3.) A bench of this court by an order dtd. 29/3/2022 took note of the statement made by learned Senior counsel for respondent No.4 that respondent No.4 is ready to furnish an undertaking about the completion of the project of construction of elevated corridor in a time bound manner. A bench of this court further took note of the fact that in case, a new agency is engaged for completion of remaining work of the project, the project may get delayed. Thereupon respondent No.4 was directed to file an undertaking for completion of the project in a time bound manner. It appears that some disputes had arisen between the Chief Commissioner, BBMP and the contractor viz., respondent No.4. Therefore a bench of this court by an order dtd. 4/4/2022 directed the Chief Commissioner BBMP to hold a meeting with respondent No.4 and sort out the disputes and to ascertain the steps required to be taken so that the work of flyover may commence at an earliest date. Thereafter, a meeting of officers of BBMP and respondent No.4 ha been held. However, some issues viz., with regard to imposition of penalty for delay in completion of the project, furnishing of the Bank guarantee and payment of outstanding amount due to respondent No.4 have not been sorted as yet.