Disposed

Rs Development and Constructions (I) Private Limited, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Jan 2022WP(C)/610/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner company sought stay on contract work due to price escalation. Court declined to decide merits immediately, citing contract mechanism. Directed parties to resolve dispute via representation process with respondent boards within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed permitting petitioner to submit representation to 4th respondent for redressal of grievance; 4th respondent to take decision within three weeks after hearing.

Rs Development and Constructions (I) Private… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 22ND POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 610 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/s. RS DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTIONS (I) PRIVATE LIMITED, 131/1, APT ROAD ERODE, TAMILNADU, PINCODE-638003, REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER AS WELL AS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, ARUN PAUL, S/O. PAULOSE C.P., AGED 41 YEARS, CHAKKALAMOOLAYIL HOUSE, CHOONDY, PUTHENCRUZ, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA -682308.

¶8

BY ADV PAUL K.VARGHESE

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, 1ST FLOOR, MAIN BLOCK, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695001.

¶11

2 THE KERALA ROAD FUND BOARD- PROJECT MANAGEMENT UNIT, GROUND FLOOR, BSNL OFFICE BUILDING, CGM(O) DOORSANCHAR BHAVAN, PMG JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695033, REPRESENTED BY THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, KRFB-PMU.

¶12

3 THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, KERALA ROAD FUND BOARD- PROJECT MANAGEMENT UNIT, GROUND FLOOR, BSNL OFFICE BUILDING, CGM(O) DOORSANCHAR BHAVAN, PMG JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695033.

¶13

4 KERALA INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND BOARD, 2ND FLOOR, FELICITY SQUARE, MG ROAD, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

¶14

5 THE TEAM LEADER, NORTH CIRCLE, KERALA ROAD FUND BOARD- PROJECT MAMANGALAM-EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682024.

¶15

WP(C).No.610/2022

¶16

¶17

6 THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE KERALA ROAD FUND BOARD- PROJECT MANAGEMENT UNIT, DIVISION OFFICE, VRINDAVAN COLONY, CHEVAYUR, KOZHIKODE, KERALA-673017.

¶18

7 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, THE KERALA ROAD FUND BOARD- PROJECT MANAGEMENT UNIT, DIVISION OFFICE, VRINDAVAN COLONY, CHEVAYUR, KOZHIKODE, KERALA-673017.

¶19

8 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ROADS DIVISION, WAYANADU, CIVIL STATION, MADATHUMPADI, KALPETTA, WAYANADU, KERALA-673122.

¶20

SRI.SHAMEER P.M, GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.V. MANOJKUMAR, SC FOR KRFB SRI.B.G. HARINDRANATH, SC FOR KIIFB

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

WP(C).No.610/2022

¶23

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

Dated this the 12^th day of January, 2022

¶26

The petitioner, an incorporated company carrying on the business of builders and contractors for Railways, PWD, Municipal Corporations and other Government and Semi-Government and private bodies, has approached this Court seeking to direct the 3^rd respondent to terminate Ext.P2 agreement and re-tender the work without any risk or cost on the petitioner. The petitioner further seeks to direct the 3^rd respondent to consider Ext.P15 Lawyer Notice on merits.

¶27

The petitioner won the bid for the work “KIIFB-20172018-Hill Highway-2^nd Phase Kalpetta ConstituencyPachilakkad-Kainatty Kalpetta Bypass-Meppadi-ChooralmalaArunappuzha (Improvements to Mananthavady-Kalpetta Road

¶28

WP(C).No.610/2022

¶29

¶30

from 24/600 to 30/800, Kalpetta Bypass Road from 0/000 to 3/800, Calicut-Vythiri-Gudalur Road from 75/800 to 78/050 and Chooralmala-Aranapuzha Road from 0/000 to 4/500 in Wayanad District”. The work was delayed due to reasons not attributable to the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that there is huge escalation of price in bitumen and fuel, to an extent up to 99.29%. With such huge escalation of prices, execution of the work is unviable and will be a financial disaster to the petitioner. The petitioner has already completed about 70% of work, contends the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, seeks to relieve the petitioner from the remaining work. The petitioner also seeks payment for the work already completed.

¶31

This being a contractual matter arising from an agreement as evidenced by Ext P2, this Court feels that it is not necessary to consider the grievance raised by the petitioner at this stage. Clause 30 of Ext.P2 conditions of contract provides as follows.

¶32

WP(C).No.610/2022

¶33

¶34

“30. Early Warning

¶35

30.1 The Contractor is to warn the Engineer at the earliest opportunity of specific likely future events or circumstances that may adversely affect the quality of the work, increase the Contract Price or delay the execution of works. The Engineer may require the Contractor to provide an estimate of the expected effect of the future event or circumstance on the Contract Price and Completion Date. The estimate is to be provided by the Contractor as soon as reasonably possible.

¶36

The Contractor shall cooperate with the Engineer in making and considering proposals for how the effect of such an event or circumstance can be avoided or reduced by anyone involved in the work and in carrying out any resulting instruction of the Engineer.”

¶37

The agreement contemplates future events and provides for a

¶38

mechanism to solve such issues.

¶39

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit appropriate representation

¶40

to the 4^th respondent for redressal of grievance. If the petitioner submits such a representation, the 4^th respondent shall take a decision in the matter, after giving an opportunity

¶41

WP(C).No.610/2022

¶42

¶43

of hearing to the petitioner and the Project Director. The 4^th respondent also may obtain a report from the 3^rd respondent. A decision in this regard shall be taken within a period of three

¶44

weeks.

¶45

Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE

¶46

¶47

WP(C).No.610/2022

¶48

¶49

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 610/2022

¶50

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶51

Exhibit P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE ISSUED BY THE PROJ THE PETITIONER DATE	LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE ECT DIRECTOR KIFB TO D 8.3.2019.
Exhibit P2	A TRUE COPY OF TH WORK AGREEMENT W	E RELEVANT PAGES OF ITH CONTRACT DATE
	EXECUTED BETWEEN TH	E PETITIONER AND THE
	PROJECT DIRECTOR 20.6.2019.	OF KIFB DATED
Exhibit P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER TO THE WAYANAD DATED 9.9.2	LETTER ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, 020.
Exhibit P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER TO THE WAYANAD DATED 18.9.	LETTER ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, 2020.
Exhibit P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER TO THE WAYANAD DATED 19.9.	LETTER ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, 2020.
Exhibit P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER TO THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM	LETTER ISSUED BY THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, DATED 15.2.2021.
Exhibit P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER DATED 29	LETTER ISSUED BY THE .9.2021.
Exhibit P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER TO THE KERALA ROAD FUND 11.10.2021.	LETTER ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BOARD, CALICUT DATED
Exhibit P9	A TRUE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE HINDRAN	OF THE WORK SITE CE.
Exhibit P10	A TRUE COPY OF T EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DATED 20.10.2021.	HE LETTER ISSUED BY TO THE TEAM LEADER
Exhibit P11	A TRUE COPY OF T ASSISTANT ENGINE	HE LETTER ISSUED BY ER KERALA WATER
	AUTHORITY TO THE KALPETTA DATED 25.6	ASSISTANT ENGINEER .2020.

¶52

WP(C).No.610/2022

¶53

¶54

Exhibit P12	A TRUE SUPERIN ENGINEE	COPY OF TH TENDING ENG R PWD DATED	E LETTER ISSUED BY INEER PWD TO CHIEF 12.5.2020.
Exhibit P13	A TRUE ASSISTA 12.3.20	COPY OF A L NT ENGINEER 20.	ETTER ISSUED BY THE KSEB KALPETTA DATED
Exhibit P14	A TRUE ASSISTA ASSISTA 3.7.202	COPY OF TH NT ENGINEER NT ENGINEE 0.	E LETTER ISSUED BY WATER AUTHORITY TO R KALPETTA DATED
Exhibit P15	A TRUE TO THE	COPY OF THE RESPONDENTS	LAWYER NOTICE ISSUED DATED 16.12.2021.
Exhibit P16	A TRUE DATED 2	COPY OF THE 2.12.2021.	ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD
Exhibit P17	A TRUE NO.2919	COPY OF TH 1/2020 DATED	E JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 17.12.2021.

¶55

Rs Development and Constructions (I) Private Limited, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rs Development and Constructions (I) Private Limited, v. State of Kerala

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

Sabeena .S Vs State of Kerala

Siju P. R. Vs the State of Kerala

Juliet E J Vs State of Kerala

Tinu Augustine Vs State of Kerala

Anjali Elias, Vs State of Kerala

Krishnakumar Vs the Divisional Forest Officer