Sudhir Rajwade v. The Commissioner,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE: AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH WRIT PETITION No.3939 of 2015 BETWEEN:

Sudhir Rajwade, s/o. M.G. Rajwade .. Petitioner AND The Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Tank Bund, Hyderabad, and 2 others.

.. Respondents DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 27.08.2015.

SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

1. Whether reports of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the judgments? YES/NO

2. Whether the copies of judgments may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals. YES/NO

3. Whether their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment ? YES/NO THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO Writ Petition No.3939 of 2015 ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and Sri P. Keshava Rao, learned standing counsel for the respondents.

2. This writ petition is filed questioning the inaction of the respondents in not settling the final bills along with EMDs and FSDS for the various works under representations dated 15.04.2013, 28.01.2014 and 09.04.2014 executed by the petitioner long back at Palamakula Village of Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District under JNNURM policy, as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to release the same.

3. The petitioner claims to be a civil contractor and entered into an agreement with the second respondent dated 19.09.2009 for construction of houses (Ground+3 floors) pattern at Palmakula village of Shamshabad, Ranga Reddy District under JNNURM Scheme (in four blocks) on nomination basis. Pursuant to the orders of the Government in G.O.Rt.No.141 Housing (U&IAY) Department, dated 25.07.2007, the said works were transferred to the control and supervision of the respondents. The said works were allotted to the petitioner by the A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited. The estimated cost is valued at Rs.171.26 lakhs, which prepared with SSR 2008-09 based on the strength of G.O.Ms.No.506 MA & UD Department, dated 23.07.2008 consequent to the recommendations of the technical expert committee.

On completion of the said works to the satisfaction of the respondents, the petitioner submitted his final bills. The respondents have given part payment only and now, the respondents are due an amount of Rs.10,17,652/- to the petitioner. Having failed to persuade personally, the petitioner has made representations dated 15.04.2013, 28.01.2014 and 09.04.2014 to the second respondent. The said representations are pending and no action is taken thereon. Hence, the present writ petition.

4. When the matter is taken up, learned counsel on either side agreed for disposal of the writ petition at the admission stage with

a direction to the second respondent to dispose of the representations of the petitioner expeditiously.

5. Having regard to the same, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 15.04.2013, 28.01.2014 and 09.04.2014 and pass appropriate orders as warranted under law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and communicate the decision to the petitioner. No costs. Having regard to the same, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, are closed. ___________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J Date: 27.08.2015 Isn THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO Writ Petition No.3939 of 2015

DATE: 27.08.2015 Isn