1 2025:CGHC:13516-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1493 of 2025 1 - Maa Sharda Crusher Udhyog Mines Through - Its Proprietor Vimla Singh Thakur W/o Nandbhan Singh Thakur, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Nand Villa, Narmada Nagar, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Public Works, Mahandi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Superintendent Engineer Department Of Public Works, Bilaspur Division, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Executive Engineer Department Of Public Works, Raigarh Mandal, District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 21/03/2025 2 1. Heard Mr. Shobhit Koshta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the Respondent/State. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of the notice inviting tender dated 05.03.2025 and extension of time to earlier contract granted in favour fo the petitioner and he prayed the following reliefs in the writ petition: "10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and quash the impugned notice inviting tender dated 05.03.2025 (Annexure P-6) in respect of the work contract earlier granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice. 10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and direct the respondents to kindly grant extension of time to the petitioner of 53 days (from 01.04.2025 till 23.05.2025) as the default happened for reasons beyond the control of the petitioner or may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to decide the pending representation of the petitioner regarding extension of time within such outer limit as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit in light of facts and circumstances of the case. 10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records leading to the instant case, for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.4 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice along with cost of 3 the petition." 3. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents had issued a tender on 04.03.2024 for collection of toll tax on Surajgarh Nadigaon Raod. The period of contract to collect toll tax was from 01.04.2024 to 31.03.2025 i.e. for 12 moths. The petitioner was participated in the said tender being the successful bidder he was allotted the contract of collecting toll tax of Surajgarh Nadigaon Road. 4. Vide letter dated 05.03.2024 the petitioner was informed by the respondent No.3 in pursuance thereof the agreement was also executed between the parties. Despite execution of the agreement, the formal work order could not be issued in favour of the petitioner due to imposition of Model Code of Conduct. After cessation of the Model Code of Conduct, vide communication dated 22.05.2024 the petitioner was directed to commence work from 23.05.2024, thereafter, the petitioner has started work there. Since the work order was issued to the petitioner on 24.05.2024, the extension of further period of 53 days from 01.04.2025 to 23.05.2025 was also recommended by the respondent No.3 to the respondent No. 2 but no action have been taken till date on the recommendation with extension of time and on 05.03.2025 a fresh NIT has been issued for collection of the toll tax over Mahanadi bridge of the same place which was to be opened on 20.03.2025, therefore, the present petition has been filed with the aforesaid relief. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since the work order was issued after a delay of 53 days, therefore, he may be permitted to continue for further period of 53 days from 01.04.2025 to 23.05.2025 under the same terms and conditions of the work order issued on 24.05.2024 in favour of the petitioner. 6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the state on advance copy would submit that due to Model Code of Conduct the work order could not be issued in favour of the petitioner before 01.04.2024 and it could be issued on 24.05.2024. The loss assessed to the petitioner for 53 days has already been considered by the department and the amount has been adjusted which has also been informed to the 4 petitioner vide communication dated 22.05.2024 fresh office memo No. 2509/ वलेलिल /dated 22.05.2024. Further the fresh tender has also been published which was opened on 20.03.2025 but no bid was received, therefore, the new tender is going to be published by the department and since no loss caused to the petitioner and the amount of 53 days had already been adjusted, no relief can be granted to the petitioner for extension of time on the earlier contract and his petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the document annexed with the petition. 8. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering that the work order was issued to the petitioner on the earlier contract on 24.05.2024 for the period upto 31.03.2025 and for the period on 01.04.2025 to 31.03.2026 a new tender was published by the department. Although the work order was issued in favour of the petitioner after delay of 53 days but that was due to the Model Code of Conduct and the loss caused to the petitioner for 53 days have already been adjusted in the total cost of work order, therefore, no prejudice is being caused to the petitioner even when the work order was issued after about 53 days. The nature of work was to collect toll tax and the loss of 53 days was already adjusted, therefore, we do not find any ground to grant relief to the petitioner in the present writ petition. 9. In the result, the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Alok ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.03.27 19:16:42 +0530