- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1958 WP No. 106867 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO.106867 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: RAGHURAM S/O. VENKAPPA SHETTY, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: CIVIL CONTRACTOR, R/O: CHAMUNDI HEIGHTS, JAYANAGAR, VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI – 580 020, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. …PETITIONER (BY SRI D. J. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION CIRCLE, KALBURGI, DIST: KALBURGI – 585 101. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION 583277 KUSTAGI, TQ: YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 AND RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONSIDER REPRESENTATION DATED 03- 11-2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R-1 AND R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE-G. ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO RELEASE THE FINAL BILL PENDING PAYMENT RS. 35 LAKHS AND TO REFUND THE EMD AND SD AMOUNTING TO RS. 13 LAKHS WITH 24% INTEREST AND ETC., Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1958 WP No. 106867 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: “a) Issue writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 and respondent No.2 to consider representation dated 03.11.2021 filed by the petitioner before the R-1 and R-2 vide Annexure-G. b) Issue writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to release the final bill pending payment of Rs.35 Lakhs and to refund the EMD and SD amounting to Rs.13 Lakhs with 24%interest. c) Pass such other order as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case to meet the ends of justice and equity.” 2. Pursuant to the tender, work order is issued to the father of the petitioner to execute certain works and after the said execution, on 12.01.2016, the father of the petitioner is said to have submitted a representation and also caused a legal notice at a later point in time. Those representations are not considered and the petitioner was constrained to submit another representation on 03.11.2021 seeking release of the final bill of Rs.35,00,000/- and also to refund the EMD at Rs.13,00,000/- - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1958 WP No. 106867 of 2024 along with interest. The representations are not considered, therefore the petitioner is before the Court. 3. Learned AGA would submit that, if reasonable time is granted, the representation of the petitioner would be considered strictly in consonance with law. 4. In the light of the said submission, I deem it appropriate to dispose the petition directing the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioner in accordance with law and pass necessary orders within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the order so passed be communicated to the petitioner. 5. It is made clear that, this Court has not considered the merit of the claim of the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE VNP/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17