JOSEPH VELUPUZHAKKAL Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved with the fact that the Government is insisting for a Performance Guarantee to be furnished; as 50% Treasury Deposit and 50% Bank Guarantee. The petitioner submits that the petitioner is an approved contractor and is carrying on many works and there is always delay in payment of bills of the completed works. In such circumstance, due to paucity of funds, the petitioner is ready to furnish two Bank Guarantees as is seen from Exts.P3 and P4, which can be accepted for awarding the work.

(2.) The learned Government Pleader specifically points to the PWD Manual, which insists for furnishing 50% of the Performance Guarantee; as Treasury Deposit and 50% as Bank Guarantee. In such circumstance, there can be no deviation from the specific provision, is the contention.

(3.) In considering the prayer of the petitioner, this Court cannot ignore the fact that there are a number of writ petitions filed before this Court, by contractors seeking directions to the Government to pay up their dues, of works completed satisfactorily. There are also instances, where the retention amounts have not been refunded to the contractors, after the satisfactory completion of the work and guarantee period being over. The Government have been taking inconsistent stances as to the measurement being necessitated, approval being required from higher authorities or sanction being essential from the Finance Department. One department blaming the other has become the order of the day and there is absolute lack of co-ordination. The hapless contractors are left high and dry without satisfaction of their dues and are often faced with ruination for reason of the works having been completed often by taking loans. Added to this misery is the insistence of the Government to provide cash security as Performance Guarantee. It is also pertinent that despite orders issued by this Court, the Government often does not pay off the amounts in time and again the contractor is faced with the situation of coming back to this Court with a contempt petition.