BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, ACJ

(1) THESE two mandamus appeals were heard together as these are preferred against the self-same order dated 6th August, 2007 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship allowed a writ application filed by the Universal Cable Ltd. , the private respondent in these appeals, by setting aside the decision of the Metro Railway authority to award contract in favour of NICCO Corporation Limited ("nicco"), the appellant, in one of these appeals with the observation that whatever amount of work had already been executed by NICCO should not be undone and it would be entitled to the payment as per its entitlement for the work done till the date of delivery of judgment. His Lordship, however, directed the Metro railway Authority to proceed to award the contract for the balance work to the next eligible tenderer or to initiate fresh process for execution of the balance work with further direction that in such a case, NICCO would not be entitled to participate in the process of fresh tender.

(2) BEING dissatisfied, both the NICCO and the Metro Railway Authority have preferred these two separate appeals.

(3) THE Universal Cable Limite