IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10014 of 2009 With C.W.J.C.No. 10033 of 2009 M/S AJANTA CONSTRUCTION COMPAN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS 2 20.8.2009 The aforesaid writ applications are taken up together as the matter pertains to the same petitioner and issues involved are more or less common in nature. The petitioner in C.W.J.C. No.10014/09 was given contract work vide Agreement No.2SBD/06-07 for widening and strengthening in 1 to 19 kms. of Khagaria – Parihara – Bakhri Road under Plan head 2006 – 2007. The value of the work was Rs.9,91,31,085/-. The work was to start on 7.2.2007 and the date of completion was 6.3.2009. The petitioner states that on account of unprecedented rain and damage to the approach road the work could not continue as the situation was beyond control. The petitioner states that despite adverse working circumstances, he executed the work to the tune of Rs.3,42,30,244/- out of which only Rs.2,17,27,219/- was paid. Learned counsel submits that even the escalation cost of bitumen to the tune of Rs.67,19,037/- was not paid. In another writ application, namely, C.W.J.C. No.10033/09, the matter relates to the work done by the petitioner under Agreement No.1 SBD/20 of 07 for widening and strengthening of Maheshkhut – Gogari- Parwatta – Sultanganj Ghat in Kms. 6 to 10, 16 to 20 and 23 to 30 under Plan head 2006- 2007. 2 The value of the agreement was Rs.8,61,32,081/-. The date of starting the work was 7.3.2007 and the date of completion of the work was 6.9.2008. The petitioner states that owing to unprecedented rain and damage to the approach road he could not complete the work. He states that in spite of the adverse working condition he still executed substantial work to the tune of Rs.3,35,73,498/- still only partial payment has been made. The petitioner states that both the contract work have been rescinded. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has given several representations before the concerned respondents but they have not considered the same. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I observe that if the petitioner makes fresh application before the respondent Engineer – in – Chief, Road Construction Department, North Bihar, Patna, raising all the grievance, the same would be disposed of by respondent no.3, preferably within four weeks from the date of receipt of the application. The finalization of the fresh tender would be subject to the disposal of the representation by the Engineer-in-Chief,R.C.D. who may consider the letter dated 20.4.2009 contained in Memo No.744/778 of the Superintending Engineer also. With the aforesaid observations and directions this writ application is disposed of. Anilkrsinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)