S.N. RAMASAMY RAJU Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HIGHWAYS (RURAL DEVELOPMENT) DEPT., FORT ST. GEORGE, MADRAS,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who claims to be a registered contractor, prays for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the entire records of the 3rd respondent in connection with the impugned order made in letter No.257/98 -A5 dated 11.11.98 and the consequential tender notification No.84/98/R.D.2 dated 20.11.98 of the 2nd respondent published in the Malai Malar dated 25.11.98 insofar as item No.4 is concerned, and quash the said impugned order dated 11.11.98 of the 3rd respondent and the tender notification dated 20.11.98 of the 2nd respondent and consequently, forbear the respondents from in any way interfering with the construction work and completion of the bridge work by the petitioner at Chitoor -Tiruttani Road in the road leading to Peddanagapundi in K.M.6 across Veeramangalam Channel.

(2.) HEARD Mr. D. Rajendran, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and Mr. Kumaresh Babu, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

(3.) A perusal of the impugned order dated 11.11.98 would show that a contract was awarded and agreement was executed on 3.6.98 by the petitioner. The petitioner was granted three months time to complete the work. The petitioner committed default. Though the petitioner has committed default, he was granted extension of time up to 15.12.98. Even within the extended time, the petitioner had not completed the work. On 30.10.98, the petitioner was called upon to complete the work, while granting extension of time. Despite the said notice, the petitioner has neither started the work nor he had shown any progress. As the petitioner had not shown any progress in the work, a notice was issued once again and on 10.11.98, the contract was terminated.