- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and perused the various earlier affidavits and subsequent filed affidavit by the State as well as the chart submitted along with affidavit dated 14.08.2012. It appears from the chart that in a case where agreement was executed on 15.03.2010 and work was to the cost of Rs.234.71 Crores and that cost is for the various works and out of those various works up to 15th July, 2012 no work was undertaken in eight matters. In rest of the matters, the incomplete work was to the extent of 80-90 per cent. In two matters, the work may be completed to the extent of 47 and 45 per cent leaving 53 and 55 per cent respectively incomplete. It is not in dispute that about Rs.23.00 Crores has been paid to the Company for mobilisation of the work.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the State drew our attention to the reason for non-completion of the work which has been given in the last column of the chart. Serious allegation has been levelled by the petitioner against the Company in question and according to him, such Company even sought enhancement of the cost of the work by 115 more crores of rupees for which recommendation was given by the department for enhancing the cost. It is also submitted that there are serious allegations against the Company of giving bribe to the politician who are on the helm of affairs on earlier time. It is also submitted that the enhancement of the cost of the work by 115 crores, according to the petitioner, is due to reason of giving bribe. It is also submitted that there are reports that the Company is involved in giving bribe not only in the State of Jharkhand but in the other State also. The matter requires serious consideration and, therefore, further opportunity is granted to the State to submit before this Court whether enhancement of cost of the work by 115 Crores of rupees has been sanctioned or not. If such sanctioned enhancement has been given then whether it was due to increase in the cost of the work or for any other reason which may be specified. The date of start of work and the quantity of work up to 31st December, 2012 which has already been completed and about the remaining quantity of work may be given in the same way as has been given in the chart submitted alongwith the affidavit dated 14.08.2012. The State may also state whether any extension of time has been given to the Company in question for completion of the work and if so, by what time the work should have been completed. Whether any warning has been given to the contractor if the contractor was at fault in completion of the work.
(3.) LAST opportunity is granted to the C.B.I to submit the status report as sought by order dated 29th October, 2012. Put up this case on 25.02.2013. Copy of the order be given to the learned counsel for the State and counsel for the C.B.I.;