Madhya Pradesh High Court
Offshore Infrastructures Limited ... vs Rural Electrification Corporation ... on 12 November, 2025
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak, Anil Verma
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29723
1 WP-28470-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
WRIT PETITION No. 28470 of 2023
OFFSHORE INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED THROUGH ITS
AUTHORISED SIGNATORY PROVASH C. TRIPATHY SENIOR
PROJECT
Versus
RURAL ELECTRIFICATION CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Harish Dixit - learned Senior Advocate with Shri Anand Dixit and Parth Dixit
- Advocates for the petitioner.
Shri Chetan Kanungo - Advocate for respondent No.1.
Shri Sameer Kumar Shrivastava - Advocate for respondents No.2, 3 and 4.
Shri Ravindra Dixit - Advocate for respondent No.5.
ORDER
(Passed on 11th day of December, 2025) Per: Justice Anand Pathak 1 . The instant Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:-
"7.1 Quashing the communication dated 17.02.2023 (Annexure P-10) of closing the project without deciding the proposal dated 05.02.2021 of the Respondent No.3 for appropriation of funds.
7.2 Directing Respondent No.1 to grant competent approval for necessary allocation of fund to be released under the project as Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA CHATURVEDI Signing time: 12/11/2025 1:33:34 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29723
2 WP-28470-2023 demanded by Respondent No.3 vide its letter dated 05.02.2021 (Annexure P-7) so as to enable them to make payment of the Petitioner at the earliest.
7.3 Directing respondent No.2 to 4 to make payment of the Petitioner of the work certified to have actually completed by it.
7.4 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court finds appropriate in the matter may kindly be granted.
7.5 Costs."
2 . Facts of the case in short are that petitioner is a Private Limited Company engaged in the business of construction of Infrastructure Projects. Respondent No.3 invited tender for the project of Electrification Works in many Districts like Sehore, Betul (Part-II), Rajgarh, Shivpuri, Guna, Ashoknagar and Morena under the Madhya Pradesh Deendayal Upadhyaya Gram Jyoti Yojana (DDUGJY) Scheme on behalf of MPMKVVCL, Bhopal. Petitioner participated in the bid vide Package No. MPMKWCL/DDUGJY/2017-18/R/12/Guna for a contract value of ₹93.31 crore. Petitioner's bid was accepted by respondent No.3 and a notification of award was issued vide letter No.MD/MK/RP-DDUGJY/2017-18/PKG- R/12/NOA-Guna/Bhopal dated 27/07/2017 and agreement was executed on 23/08/2017. The total contract price was Rs.93,31,94,607/-. Petitioner started execution of assigned work and during execution, respondents No.2 to 4 had ordered petitioner to execute additional work of 5 nos. of 33/11 KV new substations due to Vidhan Sabha assurance and to maintain load management in the are as per Government directives and erection of 218 Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA CHATURVEDI Signing time: 12/11/2025 1:33:34 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29723 3 WP-28470-2023 KMs. Lt line for implementation of Saubhagya priority works to provide the end point connectivity to various UE households in the districts. Petitioner executed the aforementioned additional work costing to Rs.1.25 Crores on the direction of respondents No.2 to 4. Completion Certificate dated 25/11/2019 (Annexure P/4) was issued by respondent No.4 and final closure of the project was issued by respondent No.4 vide letter dated 12/02/2021 (Annexure P/5). Respondents paid last bill to the petitioner on 10/06/2021, however, did not pay the bill in relation to additional work amounting to Rs.1.25 crore as referred above, which is the cause of action for filing the instant petition.
3 . It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner had successfully completed the work allotted to him under the project. Besides that respondent no.2 to 4 requested the petitioner to do some additional work of 5 nos. of 33/11 KV new substations due to Vidhan Sabha assurance and to maintain load management in the area as per Government directives and erection of 218 KMs. Lt line for implementation of Saubhagya priority works and under the directives of respondent No.3, petitioner completed the said additional work also. Petitioner was paid the bills of the project allotted to him, but the bill for completing additional work amounting to Rs.1.25 crores was not paid to the petitioner and the same was denied. It is further submitted that respondents/ authorities are bound to pay the additional bill because it is admitted situation that petitioner has completed the said work and completion certificate dated 25/11/2019 (Annexure P/4) has also been issued to him. Without clearing all the dues, Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA CHATURVEDI Signing time: 12/11/2025 1:33:34 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29723 4 WP-28470-2023 respondents have closed the project, the same is arbitrary and illegal. Petitioner has sent several reminders and requested for paying the bills, but till date no amount has been paid to the petitioner, hence, it is prayed that direction may kindly be given to respondent no.1 to grant approval for necessary allocation of fund to be released under the project as demanded by respondent no.3 vide its letter dated 05/02/2021 (Annexure P/7) so that payment can be released in favour of petitioner.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1 opposed the prayer and submits that respondent No.1 is a nodal agency and its role is limited only to monitor the execution of projects awarded by DISCOMs in pursuance of the scheme. Respondent No.1 is restricted to sanction, monitor and disburse the amount after final approval and respondent no.1 is not bound by any obligation whether contractual or statutory to petitioner/company. Another ground for rejection of bill according to respondent No.1 is that sunset period of DDUGJY was up to 31/03/2022. Thus, prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
5. Learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 4 also opposed the prayer with the submission that work was assigned to the petitioner by respondent No.1 and all the financial burden to pay the bills also lies upon respondent No.1 therefore, dispute is between petitioner and respondent No.1. Present respondents No.2 to 4 have forwarded the bill of petitioner for additional work to respondent no.1 on 05/02/2021, but the same was not considered by respondent no.1 and respondent no.1 has not accepted the claim of petitioner and denied to pay the bill in relation to additional work done by him. It is Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA CHATURVEDI Signing time: 12/11/2025 1:33:34 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29723 5 WP-28470-2023 further submitted that role of present respondents no.2 to 4 is confined to forward the bill to respondent no.1 and now respondent no.1 has to take decision whether payment is to be made to the petitioner or not. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7. So far as scope of interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in admitted amount is concerned, same is covered by the Apex Court in the cases of M/s Surya Constructions Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (2019) 16 SCC 794 and State of Chhattisgarh Through its Secretary, Water Resources Department and Others Vs. Baba Vishwanath Construction Through its Proprietor Dheeraj Mishra and Another, 2025 SCC Online Chh 2961 .
8. This is a case where petitioner is seeking necessary release of fund for the extra work done by it on the request of respondents specially respondents No.2 to 4. Completion Certificate dated 25/11/2019 (Annexure P/4) issued by the General Manager Circle Guna, MPMKVVCL certified that petitioner was awarded the Supply & Services Contract for Electrification works of Guna, District Gwalior region of MPMKVVCL, Bhopal in Madhya Pradesh under Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gram Jyoti Yojna (DDUGJY) as per award of contract no.MD/MK/RP-DDUGJY/2017- 18/Pkg-R/12/NOA-Guna/1223-24 dated 27/07/2017 and the work mentioned in the said certificate was completed, new substations were commissioned on 31/05/2019 and is in successful operation as on date.
9 . As per the said certificate, it is abundantly clear that petitioner/ Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA CHATURVEDI Signing time: 12/11/2025 1:33:34 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29723 6 WP-28470-2023 company completed the work assigned to it to the satisfaction of the authorities. Not only this, on 02nd February, 2021 (Annexure P/8), decision was taken by the MPMKVVCL in 122nd Business Committee of MPMKVVCL and Managing Director placed before the Business Committee the proposal for approval of Closure of Contract of DDUGJY (New) Project of Guna District as awarded to M/s Offshore Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai (petitioner herein). In pursuance thereof, vide letter dated 05/02/2021 (Annexure P/7) Chief General Manager/ respondent No.3 written a letter to the Chief Programme Manager (respondent No.1 herein) seeking release of further fund amounting to Rs.1.25 crores for the additional work done by the petitioner. Contents of the said letter are reproduced as under:-
"The physical work as per provision has been completed by Contracting Agency under DDUGJY (New) Projects of Guna District. In this connection, it is to mention that in Guna District against the sanctioned project cost is Rs.93.32 Crs, final expenditure of amount Rs.94.57 Crs is occurred due to execution of works including 05 nos. of 33/11 KV new substations due to Vidhan Sabha assurance & to maintain load management in the area as per Govt. directives and erection of 218 kms LT line for implementation of Saubhagya priority works to provide the end point connectivity to various UE households in the District. But due to ceiling limit of funds against sanctioned DPR cost, further funds amounting to Rs.1.25 Crs could not be made available in the District for which additional fund is required from REC Ltd.Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA CHATURVEDI Signing time: 12/11/2025 1:33:34 PM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29723
7 WP-28470-2023 Further, as per Standard Bidding Document (SBD) of DDUGJY, Clause SCC of GCC 20A(I) regarding quantity variation, provision of 30% increase is permitted. However, necessary funds towards such variation is not available with the Discom and is required to be allocated/ arranged from REC Ltd. It is pertinent to mention here that under DDUGJY project of Central Discom, as per Closure finalization, there is saving of approximate amount of Rs.6.21 Crs in Bhind District and Rs.1.50 Crs. in Morena District due to execution of works departmentally from where said additional fund may be accommodated. The matter regarding allotment of additional fund in Guna District was also approved by the Business Committee of Discom.
It is therefore, requested to please arrange competent approval for necessary allocation of fund to be released under the project. Meanwhile, as per sanctioned cost, closure proposal is finalized and under process of submission to REC through GoMP."
10. However, it appears that respondent no.1 did not intend to release the fund because according to it sunset period of DDUGJY is up to 31/03/2022 and therefore, it was rejected. However, in the return filed by respondent no.1, it is not a case that work has not been performed by the petitioner, but it was because of ceiling of time limit as mentioned in Clause 6 (Eligible Cost for determining grant) of Chapter II (Project Formulation and Implementation) of the Guidelines for DDUGJY Scheme as approved by Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA CHATURVEDI Signing time: 12/11/2025 1:33:34 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29723 8 WP-28470-2023 the Ministry of Power, Government of India for the implementation of scheme which specially provides that any cost escalation of project after approval of grant by the Monitoring Committee will be incurred by DISCOMs/ State Government.
11. Not only this, respondents No.2 to 4 in their reply admitted the fact that additional work was done by the petitioner and request for additional fund was made by them on 05/02/2021, which was not considered by respondent No.1 and at that point of time, it appears that sunset period was far away (more than one year), therefore, it was the duty of respondent no.1 to adhere to the demand raised by respondents No.2 to 4 for release of additional fund.
1 2 . Since additional work was undisputedly performed by the petitioner and work completion certificate has been issued on 25/11/2019 (Annexure P/4) by respondent No.4, which indicates that work was done to the satisfaction of the authorities, therefore, in the fitness of things, it is the duty of respondents to pay the amount in excess to the agreed amount commensurating with the additional work done.
13. Cumulatively, case of petitioner is made out for grant of additional amount due to petitioner (approximately 1.25 crores). Respondent No.1 is directed to release the fund of Rs.1.25 crore to respondents No.2 to 4 within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, so that respondents No.2 to 4 can disburse the same in favour of the petitioner within one month therefrom. However, if respondent No.1 does not release the fund within two months, then respondents No.2 to 4 shall pay the amount Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARSHA CHATURVEDI Signing time: 12/11/2025 1:33:34 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29723 9 WP-28470-2023 due to petitioner i.e. Rs.1.25 Crore within one month and shall claim the same from respondent No.1, which shall have to be paid by respondent No.1 within 02 months from the date demand was raised by respondents No.2 to 4 from respondent no.1. If the demand is raised by respondents No.2 to 4 then, it shall carry interest @ 6% from the date request is made till its realization.
14. With the aforesaid directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.
(ANAND PATHAK) (ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
VC
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARSHA
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 12/11/2025
1:33:34 PM