- (1.)THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. G. Sankaran, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent, as well as Mr. V. Manokaran, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the second respondent.
(2.)IT is stated by the petitioner that he is a registered contractor and he has been executing works such as laying of roads and drainage work for the first respondent Municipality. The petitioner has been executing the contract work, periodically, for the first respondent Municipality and at no point of time there was any complaint in respect of the work carried out by the petitioner.
(3.)IT is further stated by the petitioner that one of the contract works executed by the petitioner for the first respondent Municipality was laying of B. T. surface to V, VI, VII Street, Mettur Street at Athipet at the estimated cost of Rs. 4,73,000/ -. The said work had been entrusted to the petitioner in the year, 1995 and it was completed in the year, 1996. Even though the said work was completed as per the estimated value under the supervision of the Engineers of the first respondent Municipality, the first respondent had issued a memo, dated 2. 7. 1997, stating that on receipt of a complaint, the Director of Municipal Administration, the second respondent herein, had appointed the special investigation team to inspect the site.