Sri D.Sathish vs. State Of Telangana And 3 Others

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition based on the submission made by the learned Government Pleader. The Government Pleader stated that the respondents were on the verge of settling the accounts and that the petitioners' request would be considered as soon as the accounts were settled, leading to the release of the EMD, FSD, and Q.C. amounts. Consequently, the Court directed the respondents to complete the account settlement exercise as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No order as to costs was made. The issue regarding the insistence on GST above 5% was not explicitly decided on merits but was implicitly addressed by the direction to release the amounts upon account settlement.

Facts

The petitioners, Sri D. Sathish, Sri F. Sridhar, Sri B. Venkata Narsa Raju, and M/s. ANR Constructions, filed a writ petition before the High Court for the State of Telangana. They contended that despite completing contract works to the satisfaction of the respondents (State of Telangana and its Panchayath Raj department officials), their accounts were not being settled, and crucial amounts like Earnest Money Deposit (EMD), Full Security Deposit (FSD), and Quality Control (Q.C.) amounts were not being released. The petitioners sought a direction to release these amounts without insisting on GST above 5% as per tender conditions. The respondents, through the Government Pleader, submitted that they were on the verge of settling the accounts and would consider the petitioners' request upon completion of the settlement.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondents' action of withholding the EMD, FSD, and Q.C. amounts from the petitioners, despite the completion of contract works, is illegal, null, void, and arbitrary, thereby warranting a direction for their release under Article 226 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioners argued that the withholding of EMD, FSD, and Q.C. amounts was illegal and arbitrary, especially since the contract works were completed to the satisfaction of the respondents. They sought the release of these amounts without the imposition of GST beyond the stipulated 5% as per the tender conditions. Respondents' Contention: The Government Pleader for the respondents submitted that the department was in the process of settling the accounts and assured the Court that the petitioners' request for the release of EMD, FSD, and Q.C. amounts would be considered once the accounts were settled.