MUKESH ASSOCIATES Vs. MALAVIYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by M/s. Mukesh & Associates seeking appointment of an Arbitrator in terms of its agreement dated 23.03.2015 with the respondent.

(2.) As per the averments in the application, the petitioner is a registered partnership firm. It is a multidisciplinary consultancy firm based in Salem and is engaged in the business of offering consultancy in Architecture, Planning, Civil Infrastructure, Environmental Engineering, Project management, Quality auditing, Monitoring and Evaluation amongst other services. The petitioner is also registered under the provisions of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 as a 'Small Enterprise' providing services. Respondent Malviya National Institute of Technology, Jaipur, was established in 1963 as Malviya Regional Engineering College, Jaipur, as a joint venture of the Government of India and the Government of Rajasthan. Subsequently, on 26.06.2002, the respondent college was given the status of National Institute of Technology. The respondent issued an expression of interest dated 03.07.2012 for providing comprehensive consultancy services from design concept to completion (not including tendering and project management) , for construction of various buildings having a built-up area of about 25000 square meter. A pre-bid meeting was held on 25.07.2012 and the minutes thereof were circulated on 09.08.2012 clarifying certain terms. It was also clarified that the date of submission of EOI was extended to 208.201 The petitioner submitted the EOI on 18.08.2012 for all four buildings i.e. Academic Block, Convention Centre, Guest House and Hostels. When no reply was received by it, the petitioner sent letter dated 27.11.2012 to the Director of the respondent vide e-mail and fax message requesting an update on the status of the EOI submitted by the petitioner. The respondent informed the petitioner on 203.2013 that the petitioner had qualified the eligibility criteria for the consultancy work of the proposed academic block, convention centre, guest house and boys and girls hostels. The petitioner, vide letter dated 203.2013, was requested to present its conceptual plan before the Architect Selection Committee on 31.03.2013. The petitioner duly presented its conceptual plan on 31.03.2013 as per the schedule. The respondent, vide letters dated 008.2013 and 08.08.2013, informed the petitioner that it has been shortlisted by the Architect Selection Committee for final presentation and a detailed request for proposal document along- with master plan of the institute was also submitted to the petitioner. In response to those letters, the petitioner submitted its financial proposals for all four buildings vide letters dated 09.09.2013. Pursuant thereto, the respondent, vide letter dated 24.09.2013, scheduled the final presentation for all the four buildings on 05.10.2013. The petitioner submitted a soft copy of the presentations vide its letters dated 04.10.2013 and gave the final presentation on 05.10.2013 as scheduled by the respondent.

(3.) The respondent evaluated the combined technical and financial score and declared that the petitioner has secured the highest combined technical and financial score for all the four buildings. The respondent decided to award the work of architectural consultancy of boy's hostel, international hostel and studio apartments in MNIT and further decided not to go ahead with the academic block, convention centre and guest house at that stage. A meeting was held on 15.08.2014 wherein it was decided that the work of architectural consultancy of proposed boys hostel, international hostel and studio apartments at MNIT be awarded to the petitioner at the rate of 0.9% of tendered cost of project. The petitioner was required to make several modifications in the conceptual plan, which were duly carried out by the petitioner. Despite the work carried out by the petitioner, there was substantial delay in signing the final document. Several requests made by the petitioner in that behalf remained unattended. The petitioner, vide letter dated 05.11.2014 and thereafter vide letter dated 12.01.2015 requested the respondent to sign the agreement. The Stage-1 services as per the agreement were completed by the petitioner even before the agreement was signed and executed between the parties in view of the petitioner having been selected. Based on the discussions and suggestions in several meetings, revised drawings incorporating the suggestions were presented to the Director, the Dean (P & D) , Architect R.N. Sharma, HOD, Department of Architecture & Planning and MNIT team on 212.2014, which were accepted by the Director. All the designs were approved by the Director except minor revisions which were also duly carried out by the petitioner. All the concept designs, drawings, preliminary estimate etc. required for Stage-1 were submitted to the respondent on 28.02.2015. After several discussions with the respondent, the petitioner also submitted the plinth area estimate cost for the proposed infrastructure development on 15.12.2014 and revised cost estimate on 24.02.2015 which worked out to Rs.3, 97, 32, 42, 593/-.