S) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR -Z-....^3ijT__,:' WRIT PETITION N07' 72005 ll^^ai^. PETITIONER /r^.3"-": ^^^" ^v%^ . ."?•< •^y^ ^'J^ ^ / Suresh Kumar Agrawal, S/o Late Shri Bajrang Agrawal, aged about 48 years, R/o Balaji Road Carrier Near Prabhat Talkies Ganjpara, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^•••^^•^ <y^-r7^' ^^^'^" State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Secretary PWD Department Mantralaya, ^ny?< D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ^^ r^ ^'" 0^'^ w y. Superintendent Engineer, National Highway Circle, PWD Raipur, Chhattisgarh. /• Sub Divisional Officer, National Highway, Sub Division No. 2 PWD, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4. Executive Engineer, National / Highway, Division No. 2 PWD, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTCLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF CERTIORART . MANDUMUS PROHIBITION AND OTHER SUITABLEWRIT OR WRITS. DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS. ORDER OR ORDERSl XI-HC-22 T^ ^Nlcrt^, ^Tf1^4l<o, Rt<rtl<H^< ^l^<rll $b^icn 311^1 ^5<ch . ^e^\s]^ ^.................^.... ^ 200 ^TT^T^T f^TW^TI^ ^-t^^cT 3T1^T?^<n'^K^f?cT ct)i^l<n41vi Hi^cnT^ te^<{^<^i< ^3Tf^T^TT^T 27.7.2003 Shri Pai'ag Kotecha, co^insel for the petitioner. Shri Devesh Veniia, Pajiel La^7er for thc Statc, Heard, The petitiouer has pi^ 226/227 oftlie Constitution \ The inaiii grievaiice o| respondcut No,4 had taxdtccj was allotEcd to the petltk)ncr,| -ferred this writ petitbn uiider Articte ^f india, f tlie petitiouer is that on 21.6.^005 tender for thc rcinajning work which as the petitioner could uot comptete tlic work withiii the stipulated nitne, w:ltli. a. couditbtj. fliat excess amount of teiicler wiH be recovered frdni tlie eai'lier coiiU'actor, Counsel for the petit| alrcacw conipleted work of 1| not complete the reniamm.g the petitiouer is rc_acly to^ /^^^l submite fhat if fhe -tid&dcr I respondeiit No,4 and ia tuni his applicatiou, to which to the facts aiid cn'cuiiistaiic^l oner submita that tlie petitioner has 2 czuvcrts out of 16, however, he could work 011 account of excessive ralo., but complete that work, Counsel mrther m aUotted to soniebodY else Uien tlie petitioner wiU siifier loss for ^io fault on his pail ciiid respondents will rccovcr thc excess ajiioiint iofcuiTed on the coustnictiou cf those fotir culverts, Theretbre, he subi4its that fhe petiuoner may be altowed to make a reprcsentatk)n to re^pondent No,4 raismg aU the poioX'that tlie peUtioner 1s ready IQ coi|iplete tlife work witliiii tlie tmie giveii by |respoiident No,4 be dii'ected to consider lcanied couusel for tlic State has no objecuon. Havmg heard leanied cjounsel for the paTties aad havmg regard ?s of tlie case, thej^etitioner is allowecl to XI-HC-22 W^T^T t^rr^^n^T ^Rt^^cT ^^^^ 3^T •^Ni<n^, ^Tft^^Ko, Ri<ni^^< 311^1 ^?ich lRW^[T9WraT """""""""'" H^ 200 ^TI^T 5;RTTW ^cT zl nialce a repre^ento.tioii to re days froin today raisiiig all shall dccidc thc reprcscntat| m a.ccordaiice with law ait^ petmDuer. Witli tlie du-'ection aforl Consequentiy, M, (W,)| also stajid disposed of, <^i^I<n41<ri ^H<nT^'tel^t<(^<^i< ^3Tf^T3T1^T .poiideiit No.4 ^vithiii ^. period of ^even lis pohits aad in tura. respoudeiit No.4 [oii of pc.titionc.r withtn. auQtiicr 15 days ^T coiisicleriiig the poiiits ralsed by tlie :said, tlie petitioii st^irids disposed o£ ). No. 2832/05 aiid I.A. No.SS'^/Ob Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge