SPA/103/2022
2023 Latest Caselaw 1013 UK

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                  AT NAINITAL

                     SRI JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.
                                 AND
                   SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

17TH APRIL, 2023 SPECIAL APPEAL No. 102 OF 2022 Between:

M/s Chandra Constructions ......Appellant.

and

Garrison Engineer (Project) Military Engineer Services and others. ....Respondents & SPECIAL APPEAL No. 103 OF 2022 Between:

M/s Chandra Constructions ......Appellant.

and

Garrison Engineer (Project) Military Engineer Services and others. ....Respondents

Counsel for the appellant : Mr. Siddharth Sah, learned counsel.

Counsel for the respondents : Mr. Virendra Kumar Kaparwan, learned Standing Counsel for the Central Government.

Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made the following

JUDGMENT : (per Sri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.)

The appellant has preferred the aforesaid two

Appeals to assail the common judgment rendered by the

learned Single Judge in two writ petitions preferred by the

appellants, both of which have been dismissed. The first

writ petition had been preferred by the appellant being

WPMS No. 1831 of 2020, wherein the appellant had assailed the cancellation order / letter dated 09.06.2020 issued by

respondent No. 2-Chief Engineer, Bareilly Zone, Military

Engineer Services in respect of the contract awarded to the

appellant. The appellant also sought a mandamus to the

respondents to extend the period of completion of the

contract by a further period of six months. By the second

writ petition being WPMS No. 2175 of 2020, the appellant

assailed issuance of the fresh tender for completion of

unfinished work.

2. After the dismissal of the aforesaid two writ

petitions, the respondents state that they have awarded the

contract of the balance work to a third party.

3. The rights and obligations of the parties arose out

of their contract and, even if it is assumed that the

termination of the contract awarded to the appellant was

illegal, the appellant would be entitled to claim damages for

such illegal termination.

4. We have not examined the said issue on merits,

and we leave it open to the parties to raise their

submissions in that regard before the appropriate Court, as

and when the appellant raises its claim for damages.

5. We, accordingly, dispose of these Appeals leaving

it open to the appellant to pursue its relief for damages, if it

is so advised.

________________

VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dt: 17th April, 2023 Rathour