Disposed

Sri. v. Shivaji Rao v the Commissioner

Karnataka HC24 Jun 2024WP/36811/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner sought a direction to release the final bill for completed public works. The court, without expressing an opinion on merits, directed the BBMP to consider the petitioner's representation regarding payment within three months.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No. 1 directed to consider the representation dated 25.04.2016 within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Sri. v. Shivaji Rao Vs the Commissioner — Public Procurement and Tenders | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:22924 WP No. 36811 of 2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 36811 OF 2017 (LB-BMP)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. V. SHIVAJI RAO S/O B. VENKOBA RAO AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/O NO.49, 4TH MAIN SANJAYA NAGAR, BANGALORE

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI V SRINIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SUMANTH L BHARADWAJ.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE COMMISSIONER BBMP NEAR HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE-01.

¶13

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER YESHWANTHAPURA DIVISION BBMP, BANGALORE-10

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. K V MOHAN KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTUCLES 226 AND 227 OF THE COSNTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT TO RELEASE THE FINAL BILL WHICH IS PETITIONER AS SUBMITTED THE COMPLETION OF PROVIDING CC AND IMPROVING DRAINS AT HMR LAYOUT IN WARD NO. 17 (WORK CODE NO. 017-11-000016) FOR RS. 5,24,256/- BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DTED 25.4.2016 THE COPIES OF THE SAID REPATRIATION IS HEREWITH PRODUCED FOR THE KIND PERUSAL OF HON'BLE COURT AND SAME IS SUBMITTED AT ANNEXURE-A.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:22924 WP No. 36811 of 2017

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

In this writ petition, petitioner has sought for following relief:

¶23

a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction, order, thereby by direction to respondent to release the final bill which is petitioner as submitted the completion of providing CC and improving drains at HMR Layout in Ward No.17 (work code No.017-11-000016) for Rs.524,256/- by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 25.04.2016. The copies of the said repatriation is herewith produced for the kind perusal of the Hon’ble Court and same is submitted as Annexure-A.

¶24

b) Any other relief which is deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity.

¶25

The case of the petitioner is that the BBMP had called

¶26

for tender for providing CC and improving drains at HMR Layout in Ward No.17 by publishing tender notification dated 10.02.2011. The petitioner was the successful

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:22924 WP No. 36811 of 2017

¶28

bidder and hence the contract has been awarded to the petitioner. The further case of the petitioner is that pursuant to the contract, the petitioner has completed the entire work to the satisfaction of the respondents-BBMP in terms of the contract. The final bills was submitted by the petitioner for a sum of Rs.524,256/-. Since no payment has been made by the respondents-BBMP, the petitioner has given representation dated 25.04.2016 vide Annexure-A. The respondents-BBMP has not taken any action on the representation submitted by the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶29

The learned counsel for the respondents-BBMP submitted that if this Court grants some reasonable time, the respondents-BBMP will consider the representation dated 25.04.2016 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶30

Under the circumstance, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the respondent No.1 is directed to consider the representation dated 25.04.2016

¶31

NC: 2024:KHC:22924 WP No. 36811 of 2017

¶32

¶33

submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure-A, in

¶34

accordance with law, within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶35

In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

¶38

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 62

Sri. v. Shivaji Rao v the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. v. Shivaji Rao v the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Divya. G Vs Sri. Pramodh. S. J.

Smt. Papu @ Lakshmi Vs Sri. Srinivasa P

K. Yogesh Prabhu Vs the Executive Officer Taluk Panchayath

Smt H v Gayathri Vs the Commissioner

Mr R Edwin Vs the Joint Commissioner (East)

Sri. Mohammed Zameer Vs State of Karnataka