LAKHANDEO CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the above stated civil revision petitions have arisen out of award dated 14.08.2014 passed by the Bihar Public Works Contract Disputes Arbitration Tribunal, Patna in Reference Case No. 105 of 2012 and accordingly, both the aforesaid revision petitions were taken for hearing together and the above stated revision petitions are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Briefly stated facts are as follows:- Parties to the above stated revision petitions entered into an agreement for execution of the work namely, Gap-filling and Rain cut from R.D.0.00 to 10.00 H.L.M.C. under Bateshwar Asthan Ganga Pump Canal Scheme vide agreement no. 1F2 of 2009-10 on 16.06.2009 which is evident from perusal of Annexure-1 to the revision petitions. The estimated cost of the said work was at Rs. 47,36,256/- whereas the agreement value of the said work was at Rs. 40,25,818/- and time of completion of the work was only two months from the date of work order. The work order was issued on 17.06.2009. However, the work could not be completed within the period as agreed by the parties vide agreement dated 16.06.2009 and the work continued and the concerned Assistant Engineer prepared first on account bill vide M.B. No. 426 dated 02.01.2010 valued at Rs. 26,11,157/- but the aforesaid amount of Rs. 26,11,157/- was reduced and only amount of Rs. 21,42,507/- was passed on 07.01.2010. Again the Assistant Engineer prepared second on account bill vide MB No. 426 dated 15.01.2010 valued at Rs. 14,90,942/- but the aforesaid second on account bill was not paid to petitioner in C.R. No. 173 of 2014 on the ground that one Sheonandan Thakur, Junior Engineer had made complain against the Assistant Engineer as well as Executive Engineer. However, on the complaint of aforesaid Junior Engineer, the State Government constituted a flying squad to ascertain the veracity and authenticity of the complaint filed by the above stated Junior Engineer. The Flying Squad visited the office but the then Executive Engineer did not provide the required documents to Flying Squad as a result whereof the Flying Squad was not in a position to measure the actual quantity and quality of the work done by the petitioner in C.R. No. 173 of 2014.

(3.) It is pertinent to note here that claim of the petitioner in C.R. No. 173 of 2014 is that he had already completed more than 90% work allotted to him. The aforesaid Flying Squad made responsible to Executive Engineer, namely, Dharmadeo Singh and Assistant Engineer, namely, Brentus Murmu for not supplying the relevant documents to the Flying Squad. Moreover, the aforesaid Flying Squad mentioned in its report that an imaginary measurement had been entered in measurement book in respect of the work of the petitioner in C.R. No. 173 of 2014. The government did not favour the report of Flying Squad and exonerated the Executive Engineer from the charges levelled against him. Again, the Chief Engineer on 11.02.2011 constituted a Committee comprising of Shri Jagatanand Ram, In charge Assistant Engineer of the concerned Subdivision and Shri Sheo Nandan Thakur, the concerned Junior Engineer, who had made complain as well as all the Junior Engineers of the concerned Subdivision to record the measurement of the work done by the petitioner in C.R. No. 173 of 2014. However, again the Chief Engineer constituted an another independent Committee comprising of Sri Jag Nandan Ram, S.D.O., Deo Brat Mandal, Estimating Officer and Shushant Shekhar, Estimating Officer for measurement as well as other works. The aforesaid Committee did not submit report though relevant documents had already been made available to the said Committee. The petitioner in C.R. No. 173 of 2014 gave several reminders to concerned authorities for his payment but the payment was not made and thereafter petitioner in C.R. No. 173 of 2014 filed C.W.J.C. No. 7147 of 2012 before this court for issuance of direction to concerned officials to pay his dues amount with interest. The aforesaid C.W.J.C. No. 7147 of 2012 was disposed of vide order dated 05.07.2012 directing the concerned Executive Engineer to examine the bills of the petitioner in C.R. No. 173 of 2014 in the light of work done by him and ensure release of his admissible amount of the bills. Having receipt the aforesaid direction of this court, the Executive Engineer directed the concerned S.D.O. to submit final bill/ final measurement and accordingly, on 11.08.2012 he submitted final bill to concerned Executive Engineer showing recovery of Rs. 15,51,066/- and thereafter, the Executive Engineer refused to make payment of amount of second bill vide his order dated 30.09.2012. It is also pertinent to note here that according to agreement dated 16.06.2009 the rate of earth work by mechanical means was fixed at Rs. 123.40 per M 3 and petitioner in C.R. No. 173 of 2014 executed 15358.358 earth work through mechanical means till the date of first on account measurement and the total rate came to Rs. 18,25,221/- but at the time of making payment the respondent Executive Engineer reduced the above stated rate to Rs. 87.50 per M3 and at that rate the amount of Rs. 18,25,221/- was reduced to Rs. 13,43,856/- and the amount of first on account bill of Rs. 26,11,165/- was reduced to Rs. 21,42,507/- and accordingly lesser amount to the tune of Rs. 4,68,658/- was paid to petitioner in C.R. No. 173 of 2014 against first on account bill.