VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL) Prayer made in the present writ petition was for seeking issuance of directions to the respondents to make the payment of compensation to the extent of Rs.11 Lakhs along with interest on account of wrongful cancellation of contract by the respondents vide 11.12.2017 (Annexure P 3482-2018 (O&M).

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH.

CWP-1 Date of Decision:

MANJIT SINGH Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD None for the petitioner.

Mr. Pankaj Mulwani, DAG, Haryana Mr. Ashish Yadav, for respondents No. VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL) Prayer made in the present writ petition was for seeking issuance of directions to the respondents to make the payment of compensation to the extent of Rs.11 Lakhs along with interest on account of wrongful cancellation of contract by the respondents vide 11.12.2017 (Annexure P-15) with a further prayer to release the security -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH.

13482-2018 (O&M).

Date of Decision: 16.07.2024.

... Petitioner ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ.

Mr. Pankaj Mulwani, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Ashish Yadav, for respondents No.2 and 3.

Prayer made in the present writ petition was for seeking issuance of directions to the respondents to make the payment of compensation to the extent of Rs.11 Lakhs along with interest on account of wrongful cancellation of contract by the respondents vide order dated

15) with a further prayer to release the security 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 12-08-2024 22:50:42 :::

amount of Rs.29 Lakhs which was claimed to have been unnecessarily withheld by the respondents.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent passed by the Division Bench which was seized of the termination of the contract awarded in favour of the petitioner. As per the operative part of the said order dated 2018, the deci awarded was set aside and the petitioner was held entitled to continue to perform the contract during the period of its validity i.e. till 31.03.20 Liberty was granted to the petitioner to file recovery of any compensation/damages. He submits that in so far as the prayer of the petitioner for release of security amount is concerned, the same has already been done and the security furnished by the petitioner stands rele He further contends that assessment of compensation as demanded is a disputed question of fact and the same cannot be gone into by this Court at this stage as the claim made towards the damages is required to be determined by leading evidence.

Aft parties and on going through the documents appended along with the present writ petition, it is evident that twin prayer firstly for seeking release of the se compensation. So far as the issue as regards the return of the security amount is concerned, the same has already been released and the issue as to whether the petitioner ought to be awarded compensation of Rs. 11 la 3482-2018 (O&M).

amount of Rs.29 Lakhs which was claimed to have been unnecessarily withheld by the respondents.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent passed by the Division Bench which was seized of the n of the contract awarded in favour of the petitioner. As per the operative part of the said order dated 01.03.2018 passed in CWP 2018, the decision of the respondent authorities terminating the contract awarded was set aside and the petitioner was held entitled to continue to perform the contract during the period of its validity i.e. till 31.03.20 Liberty was granted to the petitioner to file recovery of any compensation/damages. He submits that in so far as the prayer of the petitioner for release of security amount is concerned, the same has already been done and the security furnished by the petitioner stands rele He further contends that assessment of compensation as demanded is a disputed question o