T. Krishna Reddy v. The State Of Telangana,
Date:19.11.2018 Between:
T.Krishna Reddy, S/o.Ranga Reddy Aged 36 years Occ:Civil Contractor, R/o.Mirzapur Village, Kosgi Mandal, Mahbubnagar District.
.. Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad & 5 others.
.. Respondents The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Petitioner is a Civil Contractor and had executed several civil works attached to the Government. It appears petitioner made a representation on 26.04.2018 to the Superintending Engineer, Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Department/4th respondent for issue of letter of authorization (LOA) to undertake the construction of Overhead Service Reservoir (OHSR) in Kosgi Mandal for the Villages of Mushrifa and Mukthipahad.
According to petitioner, he has executed similar works in several villages. Alleging that assurance was given to him by the Assistant Engineer, Kosgi and the 4th respondent, he has commenced the construction of OHSR's in those two villages. While so, the subject work is now entrusted to 6th respondent. Claiming that in view of assurance petitioner has spent substantial amounts to execute the work, alleging that the 6th respondent is interfering in his work causing financial loss and hardship, the present writ petition is filed. Admittedly, 4th respondent has not entrusted the work to the petitioner. Even before the work is entrusted, petitioner could not have commenced the construction of OHSRs in Mushrifa and Mukthipahad villages. The very same work is now entrusted to 6th respondent.
At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has paid security deposit of Rs.1,50,000/- anticipating entrustment of construction of OHSR's in Mushrifa and Mukthipahad villages and sought for refund of the said amount.
No opinion can be expressed at this stage on such claim. However, if the said amounts are deposited towards entrustment of subject work in those villages and for no other purpose, the 4th respondent may consider the request of the petitioner for refund of the amount deposited by him, if there is no legal infirmity, within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As sequel to it, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand dismissed.
____________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date: 19.11.2018 dv
Date:19.11.2018 dv