PRADEEP.P. Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner - a PWD Contractor was awarded with "Maintenance Works" of all buildings of Kuttalam Palace and construction of a reception block, belonging to the State Government. Exhibit P1 agreement was executed on 4/11/2020 and the work was to be completed within the time period stipulated thereunder. It is quite clear and evident that all the conditions in the Revised Edition - 2012 of Kerala Public Works Department Manual are applicable to the work.

(2.) Prior to the execution of the agreement, Exhibit P2 communication dtd. 2/11/2020 was issued accepting the tender quoted by the petitioner for an amount of Rs.1,80,55,155.06 and the petitioner was directed to execute the agreement within 14 days with other riders and conditions. The work was to be completed within 12 months from the date of handing over of the sites apart from other conditions fixed thereunder.

(3.) The issue involved in the writ petition is the termination of the contract as per Exhibit P11 proceedings dated 18 .11.2021 at the risk and cost of the petitioner. Termination was preceded by Exhibit P9 decision in a meeting convened by the Superintending Engineer in the presence of the petitioner. In fact, as per Exhibit P10 dtd. 6/11/2021, as instructed by the Chief Engineer, the Assistant Engineer, Public Works Department, Buildings Sec. , Kollam, issued a stop memo. It was challenged in W.P.-© No.26146 of 2021, which was later withdrawn in the light of termination notice issued by the 4th respondent dtd. 18/11/2021. It is the case of the petitioner that issuance of termination notice was irregular; without hearing the petitioner; assigning any reasons' and without taking into consideration the extension of time sought for by the petitioner on account of pandemic lock down. Therefore, petitioner challenged Exhibit P11 termination order by filing W.P.-© No.29576 of 2021, which was disposed of as per Exhibit P12 judgement dtd. 28/12/2021 directing the Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Thiruvananthapuram - the 6th respondent, to dispose of the representation made by the petitioner against Exhibit P11 termination notice and seeking extension of time. Thereafter, the 6th respondent disposed of the request made by the petitioner as per Exhibit P13 order dtd. 4/3/2022, which according to the petitioner, is without taking into consideration any of the submissions and the documents produced by the petitioner.