Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 9TH KARTHIKA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 35339 OF 2023 PETITIONER: M/S. PG CONSTRUCTIONS, AGED 55 YEARS PULLANIPARAMBIL, THRITHALA, MEZHATHUR P.O., PALAKKAD - 679 534, REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, P.P.JAYAPRAKASH, PULLANIPARAMBIL HOUSE, MEZHATHUR P.O., THRITHALA, PALAKKAD, PIN - 679534
BY ADVS. K.BABU THOMAS DRISYA DILEEP MARYKUTTY BABU RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001 2 THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, PMU, KERALA ROAD FUND BOARD, GROUND FLOOR, BSNL OFFICE BUILDING, DOORSANCHAR BHAVAN PMG ROAD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003 3 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KRFB-PMU KANNUR DIVISION , SAI APARTMENTS , PANANKAVUKULAM ROAD, OPPOSITE STATE BANK OF INDIA , PUTHIYATHERU , CHIRACKAL P.O. , KANNUR, PIN - 670011 4 THE KERALA INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND BOARD (KIIFB), 2ND FLOOR, FENCY SQUARE, M.G. ROAD, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM , REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER., PIN - 695001 SRI. S.CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR, SC, KIIFB, SRI. K.V.MANOJ KUMAR, SR. GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The petitioner vehemently argues that, even though they have completed the work entrusted to them under a contract by the 2 nd respondent, it was cancelled for no reason attributable to them, but on account of the insouciance of the Authorities concerned. They say that, therefore, they are entitled to the amounts covered by their final bills, namely Exts.P5 and P8; as also the other retained amounts, with interest from the date on which it became due, until it is actually paid. They thus pray that such sums be directed to be disbursed to them by the respondents, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. In response to the afore submissions made by
Smt.Marykutty Babu - learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.K.V.Manoj Kumar - learned Senior Government Pleader, submitted that respondents 2 and 3 are incapacitated from honouring the bills of the petitioner because, the 4 th respondent - KIIFB - being the financing agency, has raised various objections against the work and has found deficiencies in it. He added that, this is why the contract of the petitioner has been terminated at their risk and cost; and argued that the reliefs sought for in this Writ Petition are completely untenable. He thus prayed that this Writ Petition be dismissed.
3. Sri.Chandrasekharan Nair - learned Standing Counsel for
the 4th respondent, affirmed that there are several ‘Observation Reports’ raised by his client against the petitioner’s work and that they are all remaining unresolved. He submitted that, therefore, unless the petitioner is able to cogently explain the objections, the reliefs sought for in this Writ Petition cannot be granted.
4. When I evaluate and consider the afore rival positions, it
is evident that this Court cannot enter into the same and answer it affirmatively, because it would require assessment of various factual and documentary materials, which this Court cannot do, while acting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. I am, therefore, of the firm view that the 2 nd respondent
must hear the petitioner, in consultation with the 4 th respondent, and take a final decision on their claims. In the afore circumstances, this Writ Petition is allowed to the limited extent of directing the 2 nd respondent to hear the petitioner and examine all their objections and explanations to the deficiencies allegedly pointed out against them; for which purpose, the said Authority will also be at liberty to consult the 4 th respondent appropriately. A final decision in this regard shall be issued to the petitioner, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say, if, through the afore exercise, amounts are found due to the petitioner, same shall be disbursed to them within a period of two months thereafter. Sd/- RR DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 35339/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PORTION OF AGREEMENT INCLUDING LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE DATED 15- 10-2018 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION TO THE RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 REQUESTING PAYMENT DATED 7-9-2021 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.KNR1/PC-15-KRFB/2021 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 16-9-2021 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF THE PETITIONER INTIMATING WILLINGNESS TO CARRY OUT THE AGREED ITEMS DATED 27-9-2021 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.A3-2292/2019 FORWARDING C.C. III & PART BILL FOR PAYMENT OF RS.59,99,046/- DATED 30-1-2021
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF ORDER
NO.190/PWD001-15/PD/PMU-KRFB/68B/KNR/2018 DATED 22-3-2022 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 25-3-2022 Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. KNR-IV/PC-15/KRFB/2021 DATED 2-8-2022 FORWARDING FINAL BILL Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 30-9-2023