SIVARAMAN NAIR, J.

( 1 ) RESPONDENTS in Writ Petitionno. 9614/1987 which was allowed by judgment hated 3-12-1987 are the appellants before us. The learned single judge directed the present 2nd appellant (2nd respondent in the Writ Petition) not to with hold the amounts payable to the petitioner for the works executed under the agreements other than agreement No. 10/83. The correctness of that decision is under challenge. It is necessary to refer to a brief resume of facts to understand the controversy involved in this appeal. We will refer to parties as they appeared in the Writ Petition.

( 2 ) PETITIONER is a Works Contractor. He has entered into agreement no. 10/83. with the 1st respondent on 5-9-1983 for construction of Masonry blocks 7 to 14 of Singoor Reservoir project scheme. The Andhra Pradesh detailed standard specifications formed part of the contract between parties and fells for consideration. The total worth of the contract was rs. 1,21,59,459/ -. That amount was arrived at by aggregating the quantity of work multiplied by the accepted rates for each item of work. The period within which the contract was to be completed was eighteen months. A time table-cum-schedule of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document