The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of contract works as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[3302 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE K. SARATH
WRIT PETITION NO: 2478 OF 2017
Between:
R.Bakeddy, S/o. R. Ram Redd Y, aged abor-rt 75 years, Occupation Class tl Contractor, r/o. Muthireddypa llv village, .Kodair Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RES'.NDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the ilbgal action of the respondents in cance{ling the three contract works for formation of (1) BT on Rl/F Shakapur to Chikkepalli, 18412014-15 (2) providing BT on R/F from Peddadaga R & B Road to Koppunur Stage in 18612014-15 and (3) providing BT on R/F from Chandapur to Mallahalli in 19312014-15 awarded to the petitioner vide Agreement Nos. (1) No.l28l2015-
16, (2) 12912015-16 and (3) 130/2015-16, dated 11.9.2015 for the value of the contract work Rs. 1,84,89,060/-, Rs.1,96,49,9221- and Rs. 1,29,93,1731' respectively in most capricious and malafide manner whereby causing loss to the petitioner in most unwarranted manner apart from breach of contract agreement through impugned GO Rt No.267, dated 31.3.2016 as well as consequential proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent dated 13.7.2016 as being illegal, arbitrary, capricious, violative of Articles 14, 19,21 of the Constitution of lndia and
consequently direct the respondents to pay damages under the lead of loss of profit at the rate of 15o/o of the Contract amount which is well settled in view of the various judicial precedents
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 2903 OF 2017t
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to pay damages under the plead of loss of profit at the rate of 15% of the Contract amount which is well seltled in view of the varlous judicial precedents for the contracts awarded by the 3rd respondent vide Agreement Nos. (1) No.128/2015-16, (2) 12912015-16 and (3) 13012015-16, dated 11.9.2015 for the value of the contract work Rs. 1,84,89,060/-, Rs. 1,96,49,922l- and Rs. 1,29,93,1731- respectively, pending disposal of the above WP
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. K. RATHANGA PANI REDDY
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT
The Court made the following: ORDER
I
THE HON,BLESRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION No.2478 ot 2Ol7
ORDER:
Learned Counselfor the petitioner submitsthat the cause in the writpetition does not survive and the writ petition has becomeinfructuous'
Recording the saidsubmission, the Writ Petitionis dismissed as infructuous.
Miscellaneous Petitions,if any pendingin this writ petition, shzrll standdismissed. No order as to costs'
SD'- T. JAYASREE ASSISTAN REGISTRAR
//TRUECOPY'/
SE ON OFFICER
To,
1 2 ixf ,Efs'Si'ffn$fFffii#:I#jff 3. Twomcopbs BM GJP V9
r'-P8"traNrHsh
HIGH COURT
DATED:06l0gt2024
ORDER
Ja ;trE SJAT €
t
(
l,
1 [tL 2021 Cl
.'/fJ t i .)
'. c l./.T( ''.r€1-)
WP.No.2478 of 2017
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTOUS WTHOUT COSTS
<br>tpt ,b
6
'\ \v{
R. Bakeddy
The State of Telangana
K. Sarath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
