IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 7800 of 2008 Between: A.V.V.Satyanarayana S/o. Late Sri Ande Raghava Rao R/o. K.P.Palem, Mogaitur Mandal, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Govt of A.P., rep. by its Secretary, Panchayat Raj And Rural Development Department Secretariat, Hyd. 2 The Chief Engineer, NABARD (PR ), Hyd. 3 The Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj, Eluru, West Godavari Dist. 4 The Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj, Narsapur, West Godavari Dist. 5 The Deputy Executive Engineer, Pnachayat Raj, Penumamtra, West Godavari District. 6 The District Collector, West Godavari, Eluru. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction the proceedings No. AE2/NABARD RIDFX/Yerraiah Cheruvu /2004 dated 11.03.2008 issued by the Superintending Engineer, Panchayt raj, Eluru, West Godavari District, 3rd respondent herein wherein the 3rd respondent cancelled the agreement for the work pertaining to " Road from Yerraiah Cheruvu to P.Vemavaram " and forfeited all the deposits and value of the work done as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, null and void and violative of Art. 14, 19(1)(g) Constitution of India and violative of the Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents herein to pay to the Petitioner herein all the deposited and the value of the work done so far by the petitioner herein. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.A.V.SESHA SAI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.7800 OF 2008 ORDER : The petitioner is a Special Class Contactor. Pursuant to the tenders invited by the 2nd respondent – Chief Engineer, NABARD, Panchayat Raj, the petitioner who was declared as the successful bidder was awarded a contract pertaining to “Road from Yerraiah Cheruvu to P. Vemavaram”. Accordingly agreement dated 24.5.2005 was entered into between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent – Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj Circle, Kakinada, vide Agreement No.19/2005-06 under which the work was agreed to be completed by 30.04.2006. Admittedly the work could not be completed within the stipulated period in spite of the extensions granted which ultimately resulted in cancellation of the agreement dated 24.5.2005 duly forfeiting the deposits and dues payable vide proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 11.3.2008. Aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, this writ petition is filed assailing the proceedings of the 3rd respondent - Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj Circle, Kakinada, dated 11.3.2008, thereby canceling the agreement. Though various grounds have been raised assailing the impugned action, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition which arises out of a non-statutory contract. It is relevant to note that identical writ petitions viz., W.P.Nos.7954 & 10998 of 2008 filed by the same petitioner have been dismissed by this Court by an elaborate order today. For the very same reasons, this Writ Petition is also hereby dismissed. However, this shall not preclude the petitioner to work out the appropriate remedy as available under law for redressal of his grievance, if any. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J. Dt. 17.06.2008 gbs