Petitioner sought release of security deposit and maintenance expenses for a completed PMGSY road project. Court directed petitioner to rectify unsatisfactory work based on quality monitor reports before the department releases the retained amount in accordance with the contract terms.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/14TH ASWINA, 1937
WP(C).No. 7217 of 2015 (B)
PETITIONER(S):
-----------------------
K.GEOGY GEORGE, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.GEORGE, PWD CONTRACTOR, KOTTUKAPPILLY HOUSE, KUNNUMPURAM, KALPATHY P.O., PALAKKAD- 678 003.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.V.PAVITHRAN
M.P.JAYANANDAN SRI.P.SAJU
RESPONDENT(S):
-------------------------
1. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
3. MEMBER SECRETARY, KSRRDA,
4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
R1-R3 BY ADV.SRI.P.K.NIJOY, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
msv/
WP(C).No. 7217 of 2015 (B)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
Msv/
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
***************************************************************************** W.P.(C) No.7217 of 2015
****************************************************************************** Dated this the 6th day of October, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner was awarded the work PMGSY 2006-2007 Phase-VI, Package No.KR-10-10 (A) by the Public Works Department. The petitioner completed the work on 26.3.2011.
In this matter, a counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. In the counter affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner carried out the first year maintenance. Payment of each stage is subjected to quality examination by the State and National Quality Monitors. It is noted by the National Quality Monitors that the work itself is unsatisfactory and the first year maintenance work was also unsatisfactory. Therefore, the respondents in terms of the agreement, with held payment to the petitioner. The respondents in the counter affidavit also produced quality check by the National Quality Monitors.
W.P.(C) No.7217 of 2015 2
This Court is of the view that the petitioner, after adverting to the quality check report, shall carry out necessary work to the satisfaction of the Department. Thereupon, if the Department is satisfied that the petitioner has completed the work to the satisfaction, shall release the amount in accordance with the terms of the contract. If the petitioner carries out further maintenance, the quality check shall be done by the National Quality Monitors and based on the report, the amount can be released.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE
ln
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant the petitioner's prayer for releasing the security deposit and first year maintenance expenses.
Whether the petitioner must rectify quality deficiencies before receiving further payments.
K.GEOGY GEORGE
SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
MEMBER SECRETARY, KSRRDA
STATE OF KERALA
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
