Allowed

Sri Ayyapu Reddy S/O. Nagireddy v. the Deputy Chief Engineer

Karnataka HC13 Jul 2023WP/103866/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged a termination notice and sought mandatory relief for pending payments and site handover. The Court quashed the termination notice, granting the petitioner five months to complete the remaining 67% of work, but clarified that no further clearances were required and the respondent could initiate action if the deadline was missed.

What did the court decide?

The termination notice is quashed; the petitioner is granted five months to complete the work, though no further clearances are required.

Sri Ayyapu Reddy S/O. Nagireddy Vs the Deputy Chief… — Specific Performance | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:7168 WP No. 103866 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 103866 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI C. AYYAPU REDDY S/O. NAGIREDDY, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: RAILWAY CONTRACTOR, R/O: 2-9, SANGALA VILLAGE, GADWAL MANDAL, MEHABUBNAGAR DIST-509125, TELANGANA STATE.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI ARAVIND D. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad

¶13

THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, CONSTRUCTION-VI, HUBBALLI, OLD GM OFFICE BUILDING, CLUB ROAD, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI-580020.

¶14

(BY SRI M.B. KANAVI, PANEL COUNSEL.)

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE OF TERMINATION BEARING NO.DY.CN/GIN-RC/KTGG-SNNR/NL-06, DATED 08.06.2023 (ANNEXURE-P), PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT, BEING CONTRARY TO THE CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT; ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO MAKE PAYMENTS FOR THE PENDING BILLS DUE TO THE PETITIONER AND FURTHER HANDOVER HIM THE CLEARED SITE FOR PERFORMANCE AS PER THE CONTRACT

¶17

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:7168 WP No. 103866 of 2023

¶18

AND ALLOW HIM TO COMPLETE THE BALANCE WORK AS PER THE CONTRACT, ETC.,.

¶19

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned counsel for respondent.

¶22

This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to

¶23

quash the impugned notice of termination at Annexure-P dated 08.06.2023, passed by the respondent as being contrary to the conditions of contract and also for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to make payments of the pending bills and to handover him the cleared site for performance of contract in accordance with the terms of contract.

¶24

3. The petitioner was a successful bidder and was

¶25

allotted tender for performance of certain work by the respondent as per the tender notification. The tender notification specified certain timelines for performance of contract. The petitioner commenced the work but was

¶26

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:7168 WP No. 103866 of 2023

¶27

unable to complete the work and thereby a notice came to be issued on 08.06.2023 terminating the contract issued to the petitioner as per clause 62 of the Standard General Conditions of Contract. The said termination notice is questioned by the petitioner in this petition.

¶28

During the pendency of this petition, the petitioner has filed a memo contending that he would complete the remaining work as per the document dated 07.07.2023 attached along with the memo dated 13.07.2023. But however learned counsel Mr.M.B.Kanavi, representing the respondent on instruction from his client submits that he is ready and agreeable to extend the contractual period for performance of contract work if reasonable time is granted, but does not consent to the timelines prescribed by the petitioner in the memo dated 13.07.2023, more specifically the document dated 07.07.2023.

¶29

Learned counsel for respondent further contends that 33% of the contractual work is complete

¶30

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:7168 WP No. 103866 of 2023

¶31

and remaining is yet to be done and in view of this particular contract given to the petitioner, the railway line connecting to Ginigera to Raichur would get delayed and stopped due to the breach and delay committed by the petitioner. However learned counsel for respondent on instruction submits that if reasonable time is granted to complete the unfinished work, the petition could be disposed of.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioner upon instruction from this client submits that if a period of five months is granted, he would complete the remaining work. Though the learned counsel for respondent is not agreeable to the period of five months and agrees for a period of three months to be granted, considering the fact that monsoon is set in, this Court is of the opinion that if some amount of reasonable time is granted, the petitioner would be able to complete the work and handover the finished project as per the tender notification to the respondent. However, it is submitted by the learned

¶33

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:7168 WP No. 103866 of 2023

¶34

counsel for respondent that nothing remains to be performed on behalf of the respondent to facilitate the petitioner to complete the work as all permissions and clearance have already been granted. In view of the fact that the petitioner has delayed the project and exhausted the timelines, the question of further granting any permission and extension would not arise.

¶35

Placing the submission of both the learned counsels on record, this Court is of the opinion that if five months time is granted, it would be reasonable time for the petitioner to complete the work and handover the project as per the tender notification to the respondent. Accordingly I deem it appropriate to pass the following:

¶36

ORDER

¶37

i) The writ petition is allowed in part.

¶38

ii) The notice dated 08.06.2023, at Annexure-P

¶39

terminating the tender allotted to the petitioner is hereby quashed, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall

¶40

6 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:7168 WP No. 103866 of 2023

¶41

complete the remaining work within a period of five months, as per the terms and conditions of the tender notification contract.

¶42

iii) It is also made clear that no further clearance

¶43

or approvals are required to be granted by the respondent.

¶44

The petitioner can proceed further in completing the contract.

¶45

iv) It is further made clear that if the petitioner is unable to complete the contract within the time prescribed of five months from today, the respondent would be at liberty to initiate suitable action in accordance with law.

¶46

Sd/JUDGE

¶47

MRK

¶48

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38

Sri Ayyapu Reddy S/O. Nagireddy v. the Deputy Chief Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Ayyapu Reddy S/O. Nagireddy v. the Deputy Chief Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajmeer Ali S/O Khajamainuddin Vs Sri. Ravindra S/O Basavanthagouda Malipatil

Miss.N. Manjula D/O. Late N Thippaih Setty Vs the State of Karnataka

Ramesh S/O Devendrappa Kammar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Siddappa S/O Tammanna Hanagandi Vs Sri. Shantinath S/O Tammanna Hanagandi

Subhash S/O Anandappa Hubballi Vs the Executive Engineer

Shri Kishor K v S/O Rajshekharaiah Kv Vs Smt Vanita W/O. Kishor K.V.