Dismissed

Annai Infra Developers Limited v. Kerala Water Authority

Kerala HC24 Nov 2021WP(C)/19062/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam disposed of a writ petition challenging a show cause notice intended to terminate a water supply project contract. The Court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's reply and grant a hearing before passing final orders, rather than quashing the notice immediately.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's reply within two months and afford an opportunity of hearing before passing final orders.

Annai Infra Developers Limited Vs Kerala Water Authority — Specific Performance | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 19062 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ANNAI INFRA DEVELOPERS LIMITED

¶8

REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR T. RAJENDRAN,
PROJECT MANAGER, 2/9, AN TOWERS,

¶9

DR. SATHYAMOORTHY HOSPITAL OPP ROAD, 2/5,PERUNDURAI ROAD,
ERODE, TAMIL NADU 638 011

¶10

BY ADVS.
ARUN KRISHNA DHAN
T.K.SANDEEP
ARJUN SREEDHAR
ALEX ABRAHAM

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 KERALA WATER AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, JALABHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 033

¶13

2 MANAGING DIRECTOR

¶14

KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY REGIONAL DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION, JALABHAVAN,
VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 033

¶15

3THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
KERALA WATER AUTHORITY,
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PUBLIC HEALTH CIRCLE,
THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA PIN 689 101

¶16

BY ADV SHRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
 SRI. SAJI VARGHESE - KWA

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C) NO. 19062 OF 2021 2

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

Dated this the 24^th day of November, 2021

¶21

The petitioner, a Public Limited Company, is before this Court seeking to quash Ext.P6 show cause notice and to restrain the respondents from taking any adverse/punitive action including cancellation of Ext.P3 contract, without taking into consideration Ext.P7 reply and affording adequate and effective opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶22

The petitioner was awarded the project “NABARD RIDFXXIV WSS to Seethathode & Nilakkal Plapally area in Perunad Pt of Pathanamthitta Dist, Phase II, Package I- Laying of 508 mm MS Raw Water Pumping Main to TP Laying 508mm MS Clear Water Pumping Main from TP to Sump I, Sump I to Sump II, Sump II to Sump III, Sump III to OHSR at Nilakkal, Construction of Sumps and OHSRs, Supplying and Laying of Distribution Mains, Supply and Erection of Pump Sets,

¶23

WP(C) NO. 19062 OF 2021 3

¶24

Transformer sub-stations, Automation of Pumping System.”

¶25

While the petitioner was carrying on with the project, the Superintending Engineer of Kerala Water Authority issued Ext.P6 show cause notice to the petitioner alleging that the petitioner has failed to execute the work as per the Revised Schedule authenticated by the petitioner targeting to complete the work by June, 2022. The petitioner was accordingly directed to take urgent measures to keep up the Schedule or provide a satisfactory explanation. In Ext.P6 the petitioner was cautioned that unless the Kerala Water Authority receives satisfactory explanation in writing by 15.09.2020, the contract is liable to be terminated forfeiting EMD and Security Deposit and rearrange the work at the petitioner's risk and cost, without any further notice. The petitioner immediately submitted Ext.P7 reply to Ext.P6 notice. Ext.P6 was send on 11.09.2021. The petitioner approached this Court immediately fearing that the respondents may not consider Ext.P7 representation properly.

¶26

WP(C) NO. 19062 OF 2021 4

¶27

The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents

¶28

submitted that Ext.P6 show cause notice was issued in the background of Sabarimala season and taking into account the urgency of completing the work. It was to expedite the work that Ext.P6 has been issued. Now that the Superintending Engineer of the Kerala Water Authority has received Ext.P7 reply from the petitioner, any action will be taken only after considering the contentions of the petitioner in Ext.P7.

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that subsequent to Ext.P6, the work has progressed considerably and the fact situation existing as on date of issue of Ext.P6 many not be relevant any more.

¶30

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing respondents, this Court is of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of, directing the respondents to consider Ext.P7 representation submitted by the petitioner in response to Ext.P6, within a period of two months. Needless to say the petitioner shall be granted

¶31

WP(C) NO. 19062 OF 2021 5

¶32

an opportunity of hearing before passing final orders on Ext.P7.

¶33

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

sd/-

N.NAGARESH

JUDGE

hmh

WP(C) NO. 19062 OF 2021 6

¶39

¶40

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶41

`Exhibit P1`	`TRUE COPY OF TH` `OF DIRECTORS OF`	`E RE` `THE`	`SOLUTION OF THE BOARD` `PETITIONER COMPANY`
`Exhibit P2`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `SE/PHC/TVLA/184` `09-2019 ISSUED`	`THE` `7/20` `BY R`	`LETTER NO.` `18-VOL.II DATED 20-` `ESPONDENT NO. 3`
`Exhibit P3`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `DATED 22-11-201` `PETITIONER AND`	`THE` `9 EX` `KWA`	`CONTACT/AGREEMENT` `ECUTED BETWEEN THE`
`Exhibit P4`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `128/2018 DATED` `EX.ENGINEER, KW`	`THE` `02-0` `A`	`LETTER NO. PDA/DB4-` `8-2021 ISSUED BY`
`Exhibit P5`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `PLAN SUBMITTED` `08-2021`	`THE` `BY T`	`PROJECT EXECUTION` `HE PETITIONER ON 11-`
`Exhibit P6`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `SE/PHC/TVLA/184` `02-09-2021 ISSU`	`THE` `7/20` `ED B`	`SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO.` `18-VOLUME-IV DATED` `Y RESPONDENT NO. 3.`
`Exhibit P7`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `AIDL/NSP/KWA/71` `SUBMITTED BY TH`	`THE` `/202` `E PE`	`REPLY LETTER NO.` `1 DATED 11-09-2021` `TITIONER.`
`Exhibit P8`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `2021 ISSUED BY` `OFFICER, PATHAN`	`THE` `THE` `AMTH`	`LETTER DATED 12-08-` `DISTRICT LABOUR` `ITTA`
`Exhibit P9`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `2021 ISSUED BY` `OFFICER, PATHAN`	`THE` `THE` `AMTH`	`LETTER DATED 25-08-` `DISTRICT LABOUR` `ITTA.`
`Exhibit P10`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `2021 ISSUED BY` `PETITIONER.`	`THE` `THE`	`LETTER DATED 17-08-` `KWA TO THE`
`Exhibit P11`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `17-08-2021 SUBM` `TO KWA`	`THE` `ITTE`	`REPLY LETTER DATED` `D BY THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit P12`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `2021 ISSUED BY` `PETITIONER.`	`THE` `THE`	`LETTER DATED 24-08-` `KWA TO THE`
`Exhibit P13`	`A TRUE COPY OF` `2021 ISSUED BY`	`THE` `THE`	`LETTER DATED 28-08-` `PETITIONER.`

¶42

WP(C) NO. 19062 OF 2021 7

Annai Infra Developers Limited v. Kerala Water Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Annai Infra Developers Limited v. Kerala Water Authority

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

P.M.Balakrishnan Vs the State of Kerala

Dr. Sunil. J Vs Shameer. S

Jose Vs Abdul Sageer

Ajoy P.B. Vs State of Kerala

K.Bharathan @ Bharathan Menon, Vs Puthiyaveettil Karippayil Aboobacker

Suo Motu Vs Travancore Devaswom Board