TECCO & R.D. (IV) REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR. S. JAMBUNATHAN Vs. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER/CONSTRUCTION, SOUTHERN RAILWAYS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 4th respondent pertaining to impugned letter No. W. 148/GC/III/TPJ/TTP -NGT dated 01.11.2012 and quash the same and consequently directing the fourth respondent to extend the currency of the contract in accordance with the petitioner's letter dated 30.10.2012. In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 01.11.2012 passed by the Deputy Chief Engineer, Gauge Conversion -III, the fourth respondent herein, terminating the contract entered into by the writ petitioner with the respondents, in terms of clause No. 62 of the General Conditions of Contract.

(2.) THE respondents invited tenders on 14.10.2008 for the proposed new Broad Gauge Line from Nagapattinam to Tiruthuraipoondi via Tirukuvalai proposed construction of major bridge at Chainage 34554.53 for Adappar River as 8 X 19.20m PSC Box Girder in between Tirukuvalai and Tiruthuraipoondi stations. It is not in dispute that as the petitioner's tender was the lowest (Rs. 7,21,12,748/ -), the Chief Engineer/Central, the third respondent herein accepted the petitioner's offer and a Letter of Acceptance (LOA) dated 23.04.2009 was also issued.

(3.) THE respondents entered appearance and filed a counter affidavit wherein a preliminary objection was raised by the fourth respondent/the Deputy Chief Engineer by stating that the present writ petition is not maintainable as clause 63 and 64 of the General conditions of contract provides for an arbitration in case of disputes. Thereafter, the 4th respondent denies all the averments made in the affidavit filed by the petitioner and in turn accuses the petitioner of shortcomings and delay. For the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent, a reply affidavit has been filed by the writ petitioner wherein it is stated that the respondents who are the Railways should act fairly and justly and the illegality committed by them should be viewed seriously and therefore, the writ petition is maintainable. With respect to the other details, the petitioner stuck to his stand as stated in his affidavit.