The court affirmed the right of a contractor to seek exemption from costs associated with retendering under fair administrative processes.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is stated to be a contractor who has been entrusted with the work of PWD rest house, Feroke, Kozhikode. The petitioner states that the contract awarded to him has been terminated by Ext.P12, and it is seeking to challenge the afore that the petitioner has approached this Court. The petitioner is also seeking to challenge the notice at Ext.P13 demanding a deposit an amount of Rs.42,13,839.10.

2. I have heard Sri. Niresh Mathew, learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as Sri. N.B. Sunil Nath learned Government Pleader.

3. The fact that the work with reference to the construction of PWD rest house, Feroke, is already completed is not in dispute. In light of the afore, what remains for consideration is the demand of charges on account of the retendering of the contract at the "risk and cost to the petitioner”. The learned counsel for the petitioner states on account of the retendering of the work, there is no loss for the respondents, and he is ready and willing to file an appropriate representation pointing out the same before the 1^st respondent herein.

In such circumstances, this writ petition would stand disposed of, permitting the petitioner to file a representation before the 1^st respondent seeking exemption from the risk and cost imposed by Ext.P12 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If such a representation is filed, the 1^st respondent to take note of the same and pass appropriate orders thereon within a further period of six weeks thereafter. Until such a decision is taken as above, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner to be kept in abeyance.

Sd/-