East Coast Constructions And Industries Ltd vs The State Of Ap & Ors.

This writ petition is filed to issue Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, declaring the action of the respondents in levying and recovering liquidated damages of Rs.17,12,70,748/- from the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and consequently set aside the same by directing the respondents to refund the Liquidated Damages amount to the petitioner and also direct the respondents to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s representation, dated 08.11.2024 by passing a reasoned and speaking order.

Heard Sri Atchyut, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 & 3.

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a construction company incorporated under the Companies Act and is engaged in executing construction contracts. The petitioner was awarded the works of Constructions of Buildings for Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies (IIIT) at Rajiv Knowledge Valley (Idupulapaya), Kadapa District and entered into an agreement, dated 19.11.2008, for an contract value of Rs.258,18,73,351/- and the subject contract was stipulated to be completed within a period of 21 months, i.e., on or before 18.08.2010. While executing the said project, the respondents deducted certain amounts from the bills payable to the petitioner on the ground of liquidated damages. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition is filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of the waiver clause contained in the contract, such a reduction towards liquidated damages is contrary to the terms and conditions of the contract and the petitioner is entitled to receive the amount deducted towards liquidated damages amount and in this regard, the petitioner submitted a detailed representations, dated 08.11.2024 and a further representation dated 22.09.2025. Despite receipt of the said representations, the respondents have either considered the same nor furnished any response to the petitioner.

On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 & 3 submits that, since the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 22.09.2025 seeking release of the amount deducted towards liquidated damages, the said representation will be considered and an appropriate speaking order will be passed thereon, in accordance with law.

Both the learned counsel have expressed their consent for disposal of the present Writ Petition.

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Medical & Health appearing for the respondents, and having perused the material available on record, this Court is of the considered view that the present Writ Petition can be disposed of by directing the respondents 2 & 3 to consider and dispose of the representation dated 22.09.2025 submitted by the petitioner, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass an appropriate speaking order thereon, in accordance with law, within a period of three(3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.

With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.