Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Sept 30: The High Court has directed for the personal appearance of the Executive Engineer (XEn) Public Works Department for not providing feedback on stopping the payment to the contractor for construction of a transit camp in Central Kashmir’s Ganderbal district.
Justice Sanjeev Kumar directed the registry to issue notice to the Executive Engineer PWD Ganderbal Division for personal appearance on the next date to explain as to why he has not responded to the direction of court for providing feedback on halting the admitted payment of contractor.
On the previous hearing, the court sought response to the writ petition of the contractor clearly indicating why payment of admitted amount is not being made to him. It was also directed that within which time frame the department proposes to make the payment in question to the contractor-company.
Justice Kumar after having regard to the statement made by the counsel appearing for the department, deemed necessary to cause personal presence of the EE, R&B, Division Ganderbal, to ensure that the requisite response in terms of direction is filed. “Registry is directed to issue notice to the Executive Engineer, Public Works Division(R&B), Division Ganderbal, for his personal presence on the next date of hearing. Respondents shall file their objections by the next date of hearing”, Justice Kumar directed.
Advocate Asma Rashid on behalf of the contractor-firm submitted before the court that the EE vide e-tendering after being eligible has allotted the construction of transit accommodation at Wandhama Ganderbal and the petitioner-firm commenced with the construction as per the approved designs and drawing given to him by the department.
She submitted that since the work done cost exceeds the original amount due to deficient estimates made by the department as such additional tender for completion of rest of the work cannot be issued till payment to the firm is not released.
Court has been informed that the EE concerned due to mala-fides on his part, refused to release the admitted amount despite repeated requests, compelling the firm to knock the portals of the court to seek his grievance redressed.
Follow our WhatsApp channel