High Court · 2025

Judgment

1. 2 The State of Telangana, Rep. by Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad The Engineering-in-Chief (General), Hyderabad, Telangana State. its Principal Secretary, I and CAD I and CAD Department, Errumanzil,

3. The Engineering-in-Chief (lrrigation), Jalasoudha Hyderabad, Telangana State.

4. The Engineering-in-Chief (lnigation), lntegrated Kaleshwaram Project, Gajwel, Siddipet District. Building, Errumanzil, Office Complex,

5. The Superintending Engineer, lrrigation Circle, Kamareddy, Telangana State. 6. The Executive Engineer, I and CAD Department lrrigation Division No.4, Yellareddy, Kamareddy District. Telangana State. ...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not extending the benefit outlined in G.O. Ms. No. '146 dated 08.'10.2015, to Package-Z2 of Kaleswaram Pro.iect (erstwhile Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Pranahita Chevella Srujala Sravanthi), with effect from 01 .04.2018 ad illegal, arbitrary and u nco nstitutional and consequently direct the respondent to implement the price adjustment for labour and other material as specified in G.O. Ms. No. 146 dated O8l1Ol2O15 to the petitioner. -",,, lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the representation made by the petitioner vide letter No. SCL-INDU-KBL-WEG(JV)/Hydl2023-24lEE, dated 1210712023, pending disposal of the Writ Petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Order Vl rule 17 of Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner to amend the cause title by replacing the 4th respondent, "The Engineering-in-Chief (lrrigation), lntegrated Office Complex, Kaleshwaram Project, Gajwel, Siddipet District" with "the Chief Engineer, I&CAD Department, Kamareddy, Telangana State" in W. P. No.3578 of 2024 and in all lnterlocutory Applications. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SRINIVASA RAO BODDULURI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR lRRl AND COMM AREA DEV The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION N0.3578 of2024 ORDER This writ petition is Illed seeking to declare the action of the respondent in not extending the benefit outlined in G.O.Ms.No.146, Irrigation and CAD (Reform) Department, dated 0g.10.2015, to Package No.22 of Kaleswaram project (erstwhile Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Pranahita Chevella Srujala Sravanthi), wiLh effect from O 1.04.201g, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of naturaljustice and for appropriate relief.

2. It is stated that the petitioner is the successful bidder for Package No.22 of Kaleswaram project (erslwhile Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Pranahita Chevella Srujala Sravan thi), which involves Investigation, Designs and Execution of Lift Irrigation Scheme. It is stated that the petitioner has cntered into an agreement with respondent authorities uide agrecmenr No.Str/NS LtC /NZB /03 / 2008-09, dated 20.11.2008 for contract worth Rs. 1446.4g Crores on EPC (Engineering, procurement and Construction) turnkey system. It is stated that the petitioner has submitted a proposal for revised scope of work for packagc No.22 and the same was approved by the Government and conveyed uide Memo No.585/Project-IV I At / 20t8-6, dated 31.03.20i8 and additionally, Lhe Government has accorded permission for formation o[ hve new 2 reservoirs under Package No.22 uid-e Merno No.5g5/project_ IVIAI/2O18,6, dated 31.03.2018 to be taken up as a separate contract. It is stated that the petitioner is entitled for the benefit as per clause 46.2 and 46.3 of General Conditions of Contract (GCC) and price adjustment is payable in respect of cement, steel and fuel and no price adjustment is payable towards labour and other materials but the Government issued orders that price adjustment towards labour and other materials is admissible to some of trpC packages ulde G.O.Ms.No. 146, Irrigation and CAD (Reform) Department, dated 08.1o.2015. It is further stated thar in addition to steel, cement and POL, for the work done after 04.04.2013. It is stated that since the petitioner is eligible under various Government Orders issued by the Government and also in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 146, Irrigation and CAD (Reform) Department, dared

08.10.2015, the petitioner has made a representation on the file of the respondent authorities requesting to extend the benefit in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 146, Irrigation and CAD (Reform) Department, dated 08.10.2015, uide its letter No.SCL INDU-KBL WEG(JV)/Hyd /2O23-24/EE. dated 12.02.2023. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though the petitioner is entitled for consideration of its claim in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 146, Irrigation and CAD (Reform) Department, dated Og.1O.2O1S, respondent 3 authorities are wantonly, on one pretext or the other, not extending the benehts while extending the same to other contractors.

3. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and with their consent, this writ petition is disposed oi at the admission stage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that once the policy has been laid down by the Government and Lhe same has to be extended to all the conlractors, the State is not having any power to discriminate the persons in extending the benefits in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 146, Irrigation and CAD (Reform) Department, dated 08. 1O.20 15.

5. This Court, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case and as it is stated that the benehts under G.O.Ms.No.146, Irrigation and CAD (Reform) Department, dated

08.10.2015, were extended to the similarly situated persons, deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner's representation dated 12.O7.2023, strictly in accordance with the policy enunciated in G.O.Ms.No.146, Irrigation and CAD (Reform) Department, dated

08.10.2015, and pass appropriate orders, within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner. 4

6. With the above observations, There shall be no order as to costs. this Writ petition is disposed of

7. As a sequel, shall stand closed. the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, //TRUE COPYII \ S P/-T. TTRUMALA DEV| o5lul ntersbn{ / To, SECTION OFFICER ' I|::"t"?t'J[1]s:3:'"1".v' I and cAD Department Secretariat, Hyderabad, ' IlE"Slg'ffililsn#;"Jl%,loenerar), I and cAD Department, Errumanzir, ' Il3",.Hii:?J'iflr'i,:E?i,"(rrrisation)' Jarasoudha Buirding, Errumanzir, o lli".n,,iJ,3'trBi;g:i€:jfi,,",, JlllnrijiBJi,,"llreo,atea orrice comprex, 5 The superintending Engineer, rrrigation circre, Kamareddy, Terangana state. 6. The Executive Eno nt I rris a t io n D i vi s i o n No 4, y; ii",;a&; K;,' il%ti"&.1,., 3i 1"",*?, 3"" BlXile

7. One CC to SRt SR|N|VASA RAO BODDULURT, Advocate tOpUCl t Jr*f"3:;"'3f,?'if;X.$]lilBn"oMM AREA DEV, Hish court ror the state

9. Two CD Copies BSR py BS HIGH COURT DATED:1 110412025 ORDER WP.No.3578 of 2024 \ q J o 1 HE SI4 14: 2 6 plAY ?0ps ) "a' * k O6.spATcHgt) s DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS v "o(rb W \,,