S.Kanagaraj Vs The Managing Director

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to sanction the bill of amount Rs.24,97,457/- for the contract work of construction of 200 ADW

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

1/6

¶16

W.P.(MD).Nos.23254 of 2024

¶17

School Boys Hostel at Srivilliputhur in Virudhunagar District vide work order letter No. 341/DB/2021/ dated 10.10.2023.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Mayilvahana Rajendran For Respondents : Mr.J.K.Jayaselan Government Advocate

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents

¶21

to sanction the bill amount of Rs.24,97,457/- for the contract work of construction of 200 ADW School Boys Hostel at Srivilliputhur in Virudhunagar District vide work order letter No. 341/DB/2021/ dated 10.10.2023.

¶22

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the Class-I contractor and he was awarded the contract work for construction of boys hostel in Srivilliputtur and the work order was also issued to that effect on 10.10.2023 and the cite was handed over to the petitioner on 09.12.2023. However, the third respondent earmarked the site only on 03.01.2024 due to certain objection from others and the petitioner also commenced the work therefrom. There was some delay on the part of the petitioner in the contract

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

2/6

¶25

W.P.(MD).Nos.23254 of 2024

¶26

work due to some personal reasons and it was also duly intimated to the third respondent. Due to previous enmity of some other contract, the bill amount has not been paid and a complaint was also lodged before the first respondent. Consequent to that, the third respondent issued the proceedings dated 10.07.2024 imposing penalty of Rs.25,000/- for the delayed work and also passed an order of termination of the contract awarded to the petitioner. However, the bill amount has not yet been cleared till date. Hence, this writ petition came to be filed.

¶27

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submits that the petitioner's contract work was terminated in midway and the work has been completed by the Department itself. He further submits that whatever amount payable to the petitioner with regard to the said contract work, it will be paid in accordance with law.

¶28

4. Considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and also considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court directs the respondents to pay the amount payable to the petitioner, with regard to the said contract work done

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

3/6

¶31

W.P.(MD).Nos.23254 of 2024

¶32

by him, to the petitioner, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶33

5. With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶34

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No sm

¶36

17.03.2025 (2/2)

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

4/6