A KRISHNA REDDY Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a Civil Contractor, in accordance with the parameters prescribed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, he was categorised as Special Class Contractor and was registered as such with the Irrigation and Command Area Development Department. He claims to have executed several works in the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka as well in the Ministry of Railways, Government of India.

(2.) The Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Nellore, the 4th respondent herein, had invited tenders for execution of the work of Cement Concrete Lining to Kanupur Main Canal from 0.000 KMs to 7.200 KMs in Nellore district. The petitioner filed his tender for the work. The tenders were opened on 9-9-2002. The bid of the petitioner was at 9.7% below the estimated value of the work. Inasmuch the value of the work exceeded Rs. 1.00 crore; the 4th respondent submitted the matter for approval by the Commissionerate of Tenders, Hyderabad, the 2nd respondent herein. On approval being accorded by the 2nd respondent, the contract was awarded to the petitioner and an agreement was executed on 10-10-2002. The petitioner claims that he has been extended the mobilisation grant of Rs. 42.00 lakhs and that he has commenced the execution of the work.

(3.) The petitioner received a bunch of proceedings through registered post on 24-4-2003. The bunch comprised of the Memo dated 16-4-2003 issued by the Department of Irrigation and Command Area Development, Government of Andhra Pradesh, the 1st respondent herein, directing the Chief Engineer, the 3rd respondent herein, to take necessary steps for taking over the work from the petitioner. The basis for such an action is said to be the report of the Vigilance and Enforcement Department, the 6th respondent, to the effect that the petitioner did not fulfil the qualification criteria. The 1st respondent also proposed to black list the petitioner. The 3rd respondent, through proceedings dated 17-4-2003, directed the 4th respondent to take necessary action as directed by the Government. The 4th respondent, in turn, through his letter dated 19-4-2003, directed the Executive Engineer, the 5th respondent herein, to take necessary steps, as per the orders of the Government. The 5th respondent, through his letter dated 21-4-2003, had terminated the contract of the petitioner invoking Clause 60(a) of PS to A.P.S.S. and decided to invoke the bank guarantee for Rs. 50,40,000/- furnished by the petitioner.