Disposed

M/S.Bigyan Construction Pvt.Ltd v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Aug 2020WP(C)/13774/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition where a construction company sought directions to exclude a stalled road project from its bid capacity assessment due to delayed site handover and clearances, directing the respondent department to expedite consideration.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed directing the Works Department to consider the petitioner's representation and pass a reasoned order within two weeks.

M/S.Bigyan Construction Pvt.Ltd Vs State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(C) No. 13774 of 2020

¶2

10.08.2020 The matter is taken up through video conferencing.

¶3

Heard Mr. P.C. Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State-opposite parties.

¶4

The petitioner, a private limited construction company represented through its Managing Director, has filed this writ petition seeking direction to opposite party no.1 to exclude the work from the assessment of bid capacity, i.e., “Improvement to road from Institute of Mathematics to Ekamrakanan via Infocity from 12/010 Km to 13/045 Km (from Rail Vihar to RPRC boundary via Hatiasuni) in the district of Khordha under CRDP for the year 2019-20” since till date no clearance and site is handed over to its favour for execution of work.

¶5

The factual matrix of the case, in hand, is that the petitioner, being a private limited company, participated in the public tender invited by opposite party no.3 for the work “Improvement to road from Institute of Mathematics to Ekamrakanan via Infocity from 12/010 Km to 13/045 Km (from Rail Vihar to RPRC boundary via Hatiasuni) in the district of Khordha under CRDP for the year 2019-20”. Being lowest bidder, the petitioner was called upon to deposit differential cost of Additional Performance Security amount of Rs.1,62,42,060/- in favour of the department for execution of work. Accordingly agreement was signed with the date of commencement 14.10.2019 and date of

¶6

¶7

completion 13.09.2020 (11 calendar months) valuing Rs.9,21,10,573/-. The road work was to be executed at Bhubaneswar from Institute of Mathematics to Ekamrakanan via Infocity, for which various permission like Traffic permission, PH, water supply and other were to be required and the same was to be provided by the Employer/State opposite party. But neither the same was supplied till date nor was it handed over to the petitioner in spite of repeated letters submitted by the petitioner on 27.11.2019 and 22.01.2020. Further, the petitioner vide letter dated 05.02.2020 requested opposite party no.4 for handing over the site for commencement of the work after necessary clearance.

¶8

As per the guidelines issued by the Government vide office memorandum no.6300 dated 16.06.2011 towards bid capacity for qualifying the tender valuing more than three crores (300 lakhs), it will be calculated as per the current existing commitment and, as such, calculation formula of the bid capacity are prescribed therein. The bid capacity is calculated and will be less if the bidder has any work in hand. Since the work in question, as per the agreement in Annexure-1, is in the hand of the petitioner due to non-grant of any clearance and in the meantime more than eight calendar months have already over out of eleven calendar months to complete the work, the petitioner has submitted a representation on 29.05.2020 vide Annexure-4 to opposite party no.1-Commissionercum-Secretary, Works Department, Government of

¶9

¶10

Odisha, Bhubaneswar and requested to exclude the work “Improvement to road from Institute of Mathematics to Ekamrakanan via Infocity from 12/010 Km to 13/045 Km (from Rail Vihar to RPRC boundary via Hatiasuni) in the district of Khordha under CRDP for the year 2019-20” from the work in hand for calculation of bid capacity considering the above difficult situation.

¶11

Mr. P.C. Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that for no fault of the petitioner or no laches on its part, since the work site has not been handed over even though agreement has already been executed, it will be construed that the work is in the hand of the petitioner. Thereby, while participating in future bid, if the petitioner has not undertaken the said work, it will cause great prejudice to the petitioner. Therefore, it is contended that since the petitioner has already moved the State authority, i.e., opposite party no.1 by filing representation in Annexure-4 dated 29.05.2020, let the State Government consider the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

¶12

Learned Addl. Government Advocate has raised no objection to the request made by learned counsel for the petitioner as mentioned above.

¶13

Considering the limited nature of grievance made by learned counsel for the petitioner, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this writ petition stands disposed of directing opposite party no.1Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Works Department,

¶14

¶15

Government of Odisha, Bhubaneswar to consider the grievance of the petitioner as at Annexure-4 dated 29.05.2020 and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of communication/production of authenticated/certified copy of this order.

¶16

…………….…………… (Mohammad Rafiq) Chief Justice

¶17

…………….…………… (Dr. B.R. Sarangi) Judge

¶18

Alok/Ashok

M/S.Bigyan Construction Pvt.Ltd v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Bigyan Construction Pvt.Ltd v. State of Odisha

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

M/S Jindal Stainless Ltd. Vs State of Odisha

Muralidhara Majhi Vs State of Odisha

Hemanti Majhi Vs State of Odisha

M/S.Kalingafoods and Beverages Pvt.Ltd. Vs State of Odisha

Padmalaya Mohapatra Vs State of Odisha

Bansidhar Sethi Vs Election Officer, National Federation