1. The petitioner has primarily challenged the termination order bearing no.1668 dated 07.12.2017 whereby the respondent-State Highways Authority of Jharkhand (in short ‘SHAJ’) have taken decision to terminate its contract and has also prayed for quashing the direction contained in letter no.1670 dated 07.12.2017 issued under the signature of the Member (Technical), SHAJ whereby the Senior Manager, Central Bank of India, Corporate Finance Branch, Bank Street, Koti, Hyderabad has been directed to encash the bank guarantee deposited by the petitioner towards the performance security.

2. The factual background of the case, as stated in the writ petition, is that the respondent-SHAJ invited tender for “Widening and Strengthening/ construction of Hazaribagh-Barakagaon-Tandwa-Khelari-Bijupara (SH-7) Road (including bridges & bypass)” (hereinafter referred as EPC works). KMC and ECI (petitioner herein), a joint venture entity, participated in the tender for the said EPC works. After considering its financial background and prior experience, the petitioner was shortlisted for the EPC work, and a letter of acceptance dated 08.05.2015 was issued in its favour and, thereafter, an agreement was executed between the parties on 22.05.2015. The appointed day was fixed as 27.06.2015 and the period of completion of the project was 36 months i.e. till 26.06.2018. The respondent-SHAJ allowed the petitioner to take over the site on 26.06.2015. The petitioner represented the respondent SHAJ on 27.10.2015 about the hindrances at the project site, whereupon it was assured for removal of the difficulties and hindrances, however, nothing was done in this regard. The timeline for achieving the 1st milestone of the project was 180 days from the appointed date i.e it fell on 24.12.2015. Further, the date of achieving the 2nd milestone of the project was 26.06.2016 and that of the 3rd milestone was 05.08.2017. A committee was formed consisting of Engineer-in-Chief, Member Technical and Executive Engineer for review of the cause for the delay in the progress of the project and to examine its effect on the milestones as per the agreement. On 11.05.2016, the said committee recommended to consider re-scheduling of the milestones within the project completion period. It was mentioned inter alia that the 1st milestone was delayed due to the lack of coordination and follow up actions pertaining to land issues raised by various entities like CCL, NTPC etc. and the Contractor. During the operation period of the 2nd milestone of the project, the respondent-SHAJ vide letter no.652 dated 21.04.2017 issued notice to the petitioner to cure the default in terms of clause 23.1.1(e), (q) and (r) of the EPC contract agreement, highlighting several defaults on the part of the petitioner. The petitioner vide letter dated 11.05.2017 replied and explained the situation to the respondent-SHAJ. The petitioner provided the work programme drawn up to 05.08.2017 to the respondent-SHAJ and requested for withdrawal of cure period notice dated 21.04.2017 wherein the cure period was ending on 20.06.2017 stating that the same had been issued in contravention of the authority’s own acceptance of the committee’s recommendation dated 11.05.2016 clubbing 1st, 2nd and 3rd milestones of the project to be completed till 05.08.2017, but the respondents did not take any action thereon. It has further been averred in the writ petition that the petitioner kept on executing the work and the respondents also continued to make periodic payments. The petitioner company vide letter dated 04.08.2017 requested the respondent-SHAJ for extension of time for completion of work disclosing the reasons for the delay. Further, vide letter dated 05.08.2017, the petitioner requested the respondent-SHAJ for waiving off the 3rd milestone of the project for the purpose of clubbing the 1st, 2nd and 3rd milestones of the project in order to complete it till its scheduled date of completion. All of a sudden, the