WE BUILD (P) LTD. Vs. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking directions to the respondents to pay the amounts due to the petitioner, after amicably settling the disputes between the parties, as prescribed in clause 24.1 of the general conditions of contract. Further prayers are raised challenging Exts.P24 and P27 orders. A declaration is also sought for that the petitioner is entitled to price adjustment as provided in the contract, under Annexure 2 for the period from 15.10.2010 to 31.08.2015.

(2.) The petitioner, who is a Company engaged in taking up Government contracts, was awarded the work of 'Thiruvananthapuram Road Improvement Works Part-I, Package No.TVM-RT-01-A1-Road from Attakulagara Jn. to NH Bye-pass near Thirvallom (via) Manacaud'. The validity of the agreement was for 15 months from the date of the agreement. The initial period of validity was due to expire on 14.10.2010. However, the work was not completed in time and the period was extended on several occasions. Relying on Ext.P9 delay analysis report of the 4th respondent, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the lion's share of the delay was attributable to the employer. The petitioner contends that there is a price adjustment clause for work completion, which is applicable after the intended date of completion. When the respondents refused to honour the price adjustments clause, the petitioner approached this Court and by Ext.P25 judgment dated 12.4.2017, the 4th respondent was directed to consider the representation preferred by the petitioner by resorting to the dispute resolution mechanism contained in the contract and to attain finality within two months. Though Ext.P26 hearing notes and claim statement were furnished by the petitioner, Ext.P27 proceedings have been issued by the 4th respondent rejecting the claim of the petitioner. The said proceedings are under challenge.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner WP(C).No. 4465 of 2018 5 submits that the price escalation clause was in- operation till the ultimate completion of the contracted work as on 31.8.2015 and the benefit of the same has been arbitrarily denied to the petitioner. It is further stated that the extension of time was without any financial implications, since the delay was on the part of the employer in the completion of the work. It is therefore contended that the refusal on the part of the respondents to grant the benefit of the price escalation clause to the petitioner, till the date of completion of the work is completely illegal and unsustainable. It is further contended that in view of Ext.P9 delay analysis report prepared by the 4th respondent, the petitioner was not liable to be mulcted with any liability for the delay in the completion of the work. Ext.P13 particular conditions of contract is relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner to contend that price escalation for labour component and the material component of the contract is liable to be granted, till the completion of the work.