HARIS T.A Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One of the famous quote about School is like this: "School is a building which has four walls with tomorrow inside." The schools having sufficient infrastructure including rooms and learning spaces in good condition is decisive for students to achieve the expected academic results. The term infrastructure is comprehensive and there are number of aspects that are included in it. This include play grounds, library facilities, laboratories, computer centers, technology, machinery, tools, equipments etc. When the Government is trying to increase the infrastructure of schools where our "tomorrow is inside", it is the duty of each and every citizens of this country to help the Government to achieve the targets. PWD Contractors who are constructing the school buildings and other infrastructures should be more vigilant and should see that the works are completed within time stipulated in the contract. Contractors are not one party to a public work contract. They are also human beings. They may have school going children. While the contractors are doing the construction works in school premises, they should see the faces of innocent children who are studying in those schools waiting for better infrastructure. That is why I said that the contractors are not a party to a work contract alone, but they are also human being and hence should co-operate with the Government to see that the infrastructure constructions in schools are completed within the stipulated time. Contractors are citizen first and then only a party to a work contract. PWD contractors have got a public duty in addition to their terms and conditions in their work contract to see that the infrastructure constructions in schools entrusted to them are completed within the stipulated time.

(2.) The petitioner is a PWD contractor. He filed this writ petition aggrieved by a decision of respondents 2 and 3 whereby the contract work of a school building which was assigned to him stands cancelled at his risk and cost. The 3rd respondent invited tenders for a contract work for the construction of a school building at Government Higher Secondary School, Munderi, Kannur District. Tenders were invited during the month of October, 2020 and the tenders were opened on 4.12.2020. The petitioner was the lowest bidder and hence Ext.P1 letter dated 10.12.2020 was issued to the petitioner intimating him about his selection. Based on Ext.P1 letter, the petitioner executed an agreement with the respondents and the site was taken over by the petitioner for the work on 15.1.2021. Ext.P2 is the acknowledgment form of handing over the site to the contractor. As per Ext.P3 Project Information sheet, the time of completion of the work is 12 months. Ext.P4 is the work chart prepared as directed by the 3rd respondent.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that on 27.03.2021, as per Ext.P5 notice, the 3rd respondent informed that a delay occurred in the execution of the work. It is the case of the petitioner that Ext.P5 is issued even before completion of three months which is the first target date for achieving the work milestone of 25%. According to the petitioner, the general election of the State legislative assembly was on 06.04.2021 and the premises of the Government Higher Secondary School, Munderi was one of the poling booths in the Kannur constituency and the work could not be executed for about two weeks from 27.03.2021 to 10.04.2021. The petitioner produced Ext.P5(a) to show that the above school is a poling station for the general election. It is the further case of the petitioner that, even though the work was resumed on 12.04.2021, from 06.05.2021 the Government of Kerala declared complete lock down in Kerala due to Covid 19 pandemic which continued up to 09.06.2021. Exts.P6 to P9 are the orders. It is the case of the petitioner that, during the lock down period itself, the 3rd respondent issued Ext.P10 order terminating the contract at the risk and cost of the petitioner. It is the specific case of the petitioner that even though letter dated 03.05.2021 and letter dated 25.05.2021 of the Executive Engineer, PWD Building Division, Thalassery and also another letter dated 10.05.2021 of the Principal, Government Higher Secondary School, Munderi are referred in Ext.P10, the same was not served to the petitioner. The petitioner challenged Ext.P10 before the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent issued orders on 20.07.2021, whereby the termination of work was revoked on condition that the petitioner shall deposit the security amount as specified in the PWD manual. Ext.P11 is the order. The petitioner again submitted Ext.P12 to review Ext.P11. But the 3rd respondent replied to Ext.P12 directing the petitioner to deposit 30% of the balance work as security as prescribed in PWD manual for continuing the work. Ext.P13 is the letter. Ext.P14 is the subsequent letter issued to pay the security deposit. Subsequently, the 3rd respondent invited fresh tenders for the same work as per Ext.P16. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.