Live
- "Mana Kosam Mana Nayakkar Program Organized in Narasapuram Constituency by Janasena, TDP and BJP Parties"
- Keshineni Shivnath Leads Major Additions to TDP as City Celebrities Join in Support
- Srikakulam: TDP dissident leader Venkata Ramana relents
- KTR to hoist party flag on Formation Day today
- KCR, KTR, Harish hit campaign trail
- Visakhapatnam: VV Lakshminarayana seeks police protection
- Congress Lok Sabha candidate Dr. Malluravi participated in the morning walk
- CM rebukes Harish Rao’s resignation challenge, cites format issue
- Gold rates in Vijayawada surges, check the rates on 27 April 2024
- Gold rates in Hyderabad surges, check the rates on 27 April 2024
HC refuses to interfere withcan cellation of rly contract
Justice S V Bhatt of the High court at Hyderabad on Monday refused to interdict the action of the Railways in seeking to cancel the contract of one of its contractors engaged in part construction of the railway bridge and railway station Nandyal and Maduru railway stations under the South Central Railway.
Hyderabad: Justice S V Bhatt of the High court at Hyderabad on Monday refused to interdict the action of the Railways in seeking to cancel the contract of one of its contractors engaged in part construction of the railway bridge and railway station Nandyal and Maduru railway stations under the South Central Railway.
The judge, however, directed the railways to consider the representation made by the petitioner in this regard and then proceed to take any decision in the matter. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by the Avantika Contractors. The petitioner contended that the action of the authorities in seeking to cancel the contract and to forfeit the security deposit was illegal.
The petitioner said the railways having granted them time till the end of March 2014 were threatening to cancel the contract well before the time expired. It was the case of the railway that the work was at snail’s pace and though the authorities had repeatedly asked the contractor to speed up the construction work the same was not being done and due to the delay in the segment the larger railway line was delayed from being made operative.
The judge made clear that the decision in this regard was to be taken by the railways and it was not for the court to substitute its wisdom. The judge directed the concerned authorities to look into the grievance of the petitioner and then take a final decision in the matter.
