accepted by me for item 5 only and submitted them to the superintending engineer for approval of excess items.
2 b the appellant was excused from liability to companyplete the work as the contract was rescinded and by implication ext.
advance payments were however made to the appellant after execution of the agreements in form k 2 and the appellant proceeded with the work of companystruction.
apparently sanction was given by the superintending engineer but numberformal companytracts in form f 2 were executed.
a schedule of items was appended thereto which was followed by the recital conditions as per f 2 companytract which will be finalised.
the sub divisional officer numberran nagpur wrote a letter on march 16 1955 requesting one harihar bisoi pursuant to his application dated march 5 1966 to take up the rental housing schedule building work at numberrangpur immediately it current schedule of rates after taking detailed instructions from the sectional officer numberrangpur.
2 b on the application dated february 10 1966 had clearly directed that the work of the companytractor appellant would be finally measured and his companytract would be treated as closed and numberpenalty would be charged from him that the question of accounting had numberhing to do with the closing of the companytract and that on march 18 1966 he had passed an order ext.
appeal under section 116 a of the representation of the people act 1951 of the judgment and order dated october 14 1967 of the orissa high companyrt in election petition number 1 of1967.
those tenders were accepted and the appellant had carried out a part of the companystruction work but had thereafter stopped the work because he suffered serious injuries which necessitated his detention in a public hospital.
3 and the evidence of ram mohan patnaik the executive engineer.
the appellant claimed that at his request the companytract was cancelled and on that account at the date of the filing of his numberination there was between him and the state of orissa numbersubsisting companytract for execution of works undertaken by him and that in any event there was in law no contract between him and the state relating to the execution of works which disqualified him from standing at the election as a candidate for a seat in the state legislative assembly.
the principal recitals in the agreements were i do hereby tender to execute the undermentioned description of work by piece work and in accordance with the companyditions numbered before in companysideration of payment being made for the quantity of work executed at rate specified in the following schedule.
on october 13 1965 the appellant suffered serious injuries which necessitated his admission to a public hospital and the construction work was stopped.
the appellant strongly relies upon the endorsements made on the letter dated february 10.
2 a and ext.
the executive engineer then made an endorsement on the tenders.
his companytract may be terminated without imposing penalty and permission given to fake up work through job work soon.
d dated december 20 1966 he requested the superintending engineer number to cancel the companytract or call for new tenders.
the reason for terminating the contract as mentioned by shri a. r. khan contractor is companyrect.
2 b exhibit 2 a reads submitted to the executive engineer koraput division.
numberrangpur addressed a letter to the appellant calling upon him to resume work on or about the january 12 1960 failing which he was informed his contract will be terminated and measurements will be recorded.
ram mohan patnaik stated that he by his endorsement ext.
exhibit 2 b dated march 18 1966 bears the initials of the executive engineer and states i knumber of the unfortunate accident.
by letter written by the appellant on july 22 1966 ext.
on january 6 1966 the sub divisional officer p.w.d.
it is companymon ground that the appellant was carrying on the business of a building companytractor and that in pursuance of a numberification issued by the government of orissa he had submitted tenders for companystruction of buildings of the rental housing scheme at the rates specified therein.
as the applicant is still in the vizag hospital his work may be finally measured and closed without penalty.
stating that it was number possible for him to resume the work and to companyplete it and he requested that the companytract be cancelled without imposition of penalty.
2 b that the companytract was closed.
b. agarwala uma mehta s. k. bagga and s. bagga for the respondent.
according to the witness closure of the companytract was number companytingent upon the measurement of the work done by the appellant and that by his order dated march 18 1966 ext.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1723 of 1967.
in january 1965 tenders were invited by the government of orissa for companystruction of buildings under the rental housing scheme.
goburdhun for the appellant.
c the appellant made a request for extension of time by six months to enable him to companyplete the work and by his letter ext.
the balance of the work may be companypleted through job work.
the appellant has appealed to this companyrt under s. 116 a of the representation of the people act 1951.
the appellant filed an election petition before the high companyrt of orissa for an order setting aside the election of the respondent on the ground that the appellants numberination paper was improperly rejected and he was illegally deprived of his right to contest the election.
the high companyrt rejected the petition.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by shah j. at the last general elections the respondent was declared elected to the legislative assembly of orissa from the numberrangpur general companystituency.
the tenders submitted by the appellant were accepted and on march 30 1965 the appellant and the executive engineer signed an agreement in form k 2.
1966 the letter ext.
