Disposed

P.a.Isaac v. the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department

Kerala HC20 Dec 2014WP(C)/27729/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged an alleged illegality in the acceptance of PAC. The court examined a Government Order and a clarification stating the Government accepted the tender at a specific excess rate and determined PAC. The court held the Executive Engineer bound by the identification document.

What did the court decide?

Permitted the petitioner to execute the preliminary agreement in tune with Ext.P6 within a week.

P.a.Isaac Vs the Chief Engineer, Public… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

SATURDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 27729 of 2014 (M)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

P.A.ISAAC, P.W.D. CONTRACTOR, BHAGAVATHKUZHY HOUSE, NIRANAM POST, THIRUVALLA-689630.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.DOMSON J.VATTAKUZHY

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PWD BUILDINGS, TRIVANDRUM-695001.

¶11

2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

¶12

OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.W.D. BUILDING DIVISION, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645.

¶13

BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

mbr/

¶16

WP(C).No. 27729 of 2014 (M)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶19

EXHIBIT P1A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(RT)NO. 1244/2014/PWD DATED 2-9-2014.

¶20

EXHIBIT P2A TRUE COPY OF THE ESTIMATE PREPARED BY THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PWD BILDINGS DIVISION, THIRUVALLA.

¶21

EXHIBIT P3A TRUE COPY OF THE ONE SUCH BLANK FORM.

¶22

EXHIBIT P4A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 5-9-2014.

¶23

EXHIBIT P5A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12-9-2014 BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶24

EXHIBIT P6A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 16-9-2014 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶25

EXHIBIT P7A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 7-10-2014 TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶26

EXHIBIT P8A TRUE COPY OF THE BANK GURANTEE DATED 19-9-2014.

¶27

EXHIBIT P9A TRUE COPY OF THE TREASUR SAVINGS BANK RECEIPT DATED 25-9-2014.

¶28

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURE:

¶29

ANNEXURE R2(A) : G.O.(RT)NO.1244/2014/PWD DATED 2.9.2014 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES.

¶30

ANNEXURE R2(A) : TRUE OCPY OF RE-TENDER SCHEDULE.

/TRUE COPY/

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶35

= = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.27729 of 2014-M.

¶36

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

¶37

Dated this the 20^th day of December, 2014.

¶38

J U D G M E N T

¶39

The petitioner was award with the construction of excreta washout collection tank in the Duck Farm, Niranam quoting 44% in excess of PAC of Rs.24,13,569/-. Thereafter, the tender committee has considered the petitioner's proposal and suggested to award of the work to 23.84% of the above work. The petitioner accepted the above suggestion. In the preliminary agreement PAC is calculated by deducting the cost of departmental materials and thereafter PAC is arrived at. Petitioner submits that the above action is illegal. The petitioner relies on Ext.P6. Ext.P6 is the clarification issued by the Chief Engineer to the Executive Engineer. It is stated in Ext.P6 is as follows:

¶40

“With reference to above letter I may inform you that the Government has accepted the tender of above work at 23.845 above estimate rate. Now there is no issue of departmental

¶41

WP(C).No.27729/2014-M.

¶42

materials. As per clause 2104 of PWD manual there is no issue of Departmental materials to the contractor from department. All materials are purchased by the contractors. Hence no deduction for departmental materials is required. This is being followed in other division also. Hence accepted PAC will be as follows:

¶43

Estimate PAC : Rs.2413569/Add Tender Excess 23.84 % : Rs. 575395/-----------------------Accepted PAC : Rs.2988964/==========

¶44

Work can be executed with the above accepted PAC.”

¶45

Therefore, it is directed in Ext.P6 that work can be executed with the above PAC. Thus, in the light of Ext.P6 there is no issue of departmental materials and no deduction for departmental materials is required. In view of the above, I am of the view, the Executive Engineer is bound to take appropriate action on the basis of Ext.P6 and

¶46

WP(C).No.27729/2014-M.

¶47

¶48

permit the petitioner to execute preliminary agreement in the light of Ext.P6. The petitioner shall execute the

¶49

agreement in tune with Ext.P6 within a week.

¶50

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶51

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, (Judge)

¶52

Kvs/-

P.a.Isaac v. the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.a.Isaac v. the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department

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

Abdul Salam Vs the State of Kerala

Muhammadali.K Vs the Principal

St.Mary'S Catholic Church Vs State of Kerala

Anas K.A. Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

K.I.Ummer Khan Vs State of Kerala

Sugathan Vs the State of Kerala