IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10841 of 2009 AJAY KUMAR SINGH Versus CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER & ORS. ----------- 2 31.8.2009 In the instant writ application the petitioner has prayed for directing the respondents to close the contract agreement vide Agreement No.ECR/CAO/Con/WT – 42 dated 26.3.2004 and finalise the bill and make payment of the same. The petitioner states that the tender was invited on 28.2.2002 for construction of minor bridge between Daniawa Biharsharif B.G.Line, from 22.9 to 222.09 Kms. The work was allotted to him on 6.10.2003 and the agreement was entered on 26.3.2004. The work was to be completed on 5.4.2005. The value of the work was Rs.3,74,24,250/-. Learned counsel submits that the respondents in course of execution of the work have changed the specification and drawing. The respondents were to acquire land from change 22.9 to 23.09 Kms. which they did not do . In support of his contention learned counsel has drawn my attention to annexure-2. In para 9 of the petition he states that the drawing of the bridge was not provided neither they shifted H.T. electric line from working site nor the platform was constructed. The aforesaid factors hampered the execution of the work. Learned counsel submits that as the respondents could not provide acquired site and drawing, the cost of the raw materials have gone high over the period. 2 After hearing the learned counsel for the parties this Court observes that if the petitioner files representation before respondent no.2, the Chief Engineer (cons.)/South, E.C. Railway, Mahendrughat, Patna, respondent no.2, would dispose of the same with speaking order within four weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid direction this writ application is disposed of. Anilkrsinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)