K.MOHAMMED KUTTY Vs. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a contractor executing civil works. He undertook the work of construction of a road on behalf of the respondents. An agreement was executed and the petitioner completed the work as per the terms of the agreement. As per Ext.P1 circular for all works costing above Rs.6 lakhs the department and the contractors are required to purchase bitumen for themselves and complete the work. Ext.P1 circular also stipulates that the cost of bitumen will be reimbursed and the contractors are required to purchase bitumen only from Bharat Petroleum Corporation/Cochin Refineries Ltd. Ext.P1 circular also provided for payment of amounts for conveyance of the bitumen as well. According to the petitioner, in terms of Ext.P1 circular, the petitioner purchased bitumen from Cochin Refinery Ltd. for executing the work in question as per Ext.P2 to P5. Since the petitioner is entitled to actual cost of bitumen from the respondents, the petitioner submitted a claim for Rs.1,92,686.45/- as cost of bitumen so purchased and used in the execution of the work in terms of Ext.P1 circular. Since the same was not considered, the petitioner filed W.P. (C ) No.19364/2005 and by Ext.P8 judgment this Court directed the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6. Since no action was taken in accordance with the judgment, the petitioner filed a contempt of court case which was numbered as CCC No.994/2006. While that CCC was pending, The 1st respondent Exts.P11 & P12 orders rejecting the claim of the petitioner for cost of bitumen on the ground that Ext.P1 circular was issued after execution of the agreement by the petitioner and therefore the contract entered into by the petitioner cannot be governed by Ext.P1 circular. It is under the above circumstances the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:

(2.) THE 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit taking the stand that as per the agreement executed by the petitioner on 22.5.2003 there was no provision for payment of cost of bitumen . It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader before me that the tender submitted by the petitioner included cost of bitumen as well and therefore the cost of bitumen is included in the contract amount itself. A memo has been filed by the learned Government Pleader producing the agreement dated 22.5.2003 along with the agreement schedule as well, in support of the contention.