Madras High Court
K.Neelakandan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2019
Author: M.Sathyanarayanan
Bench: M.Sathyanarayanan, B.Pugalendhi
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 15.07.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
W.P.(MD)No.21917 of 2017
and
W.M.P.(MD)No.18235 of 2017
K.Neelakandan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by the Chief Secretary to Government,
Secretariat,
Fort St.George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Highways Department,
Secretariat, Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Chief Engineer,
Highways Department,
Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.
4.The District Collector,
Thanjavur District,
Thanjavur.
5.The Chief Engineer,
Public Works Department,
Thanjavur.
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
6.The Director,
Directorate of Vigilance & Anti-Corruption,
No.293, M.K.N.Road, Alandur,
Chennai – 600 016. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to
consider the representation of the petitioner dated 18.11.2017 and to
reconstruct, restructure and reinforce the over bridge constructed at
Santhapillai Railway Gate, Thanjavur, in accordance with technical
parameters without any deviation and to avail Structural Stability Certificate
from a competent body to be appointed by this Court, before letting the
over bridge for usage of general public for movement of vehicles.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Arun Prasad
For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Baskarapandian
Special Government Pleader
*****
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.) This Court, in continuation and in conjuncture with the earlier order dated 01.07.2019, is passing the following order.
2. In compliance of the directions passed by this Court in the earlier order dated 01.07.2019, additional counter affidavit dated 11.07.2019 of the respondents 1 to 4 has been filed by one Mr.M.K.Selvan, http://www.judis.nic.in 3 Chief Engineer, Highways Department, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005 / third respondent herein and the relevant portion is extracted hereunder:
“6. It is submitted that in compliance of the aforesaid order, this affidavit is filed by answering the queries raised by this Hon'ble Court along with supporting documents:
S.No Question Answer
Yes.
Agreement dated 17.08.2015 was executed with the Contractor, S.Devendiren and the site was also handed over. The Agreement period was 28 months with Scheduled date of completion as 16.12.2017.
Time had been extended to the Whether the time Contractor from 16.12.2017 to 1 schedule has been adhered 31.08.2018 vide Na.Ka.No. to for construction of 1041/2017/A1, dated 06.12.2017 & Railway Over Bridge and 12.03.2018 of Divisional Engineer (H), N laying of road?
& RR, Thanjavur, due to extension of Land Acquisition proceedings; for connecting Pedestrian subway with Service Road; for finalizing Rain Water Harvesting structures; for improvement of junction words, etc. Date of Completion of ROB 31.08.2017. Date of Completion of Rectification 05.03.2018.
http://www.judis.nic.in 4 No. Administrative Sanction (AS) was for Rs. 41.00 Crores, vide G.O.Ms.No.272, Highways Department dated 13.11.2007.
Technical Sanction (TS) was for R.42.85 Crores, vide Na.Ka.No.8823/2009/RR1, dated 08.02.2013 of Chief Engineer (Highways) – N & RR.
Revised Administrative Sanction (RAS) 2 Was there any time and was for Rs.52.12 Crores, vide cost over than? G.O.Ms.No.27, Highways & Minor Ports (HP-2) Department, dated 11.04.2017. Revised Technical Sanction (RTS) was for Rs.52.12 Crores, vide Na.Ka.No. 8823/2009/RR1, dated 20.04.2017 of Chief Engineer (Highways) – N & RR. Agreement Value was Rs.25.88 Crores vide Agreement dated 17.08.2015 with Contractor, S.Devendiren.
Actual expenditure for main Bridge work was Rs.25.01 Crores.
No cost overrun.
RAS was only for additional cost of Land Acquisitions, Shifting of Utilities, Road Furniture, Railway Land Lease, Service Road & Junction Improvements, etc. http://www.judis.nic.in 5 Yes.
The periodical monitoring had been made by the Railway Department only for the Railway portion.
During the execution of Approach Whether, during the Portion, periodical monitoring had been 3 construction of Railway made by the Assistant Engineer, Over Bridge or laying of Assistant Divisional Engineer, Divisional road, any periodical Engineer and the Superintending monitoring or inspection Engineer of N & RR and Quality Control was done by the Railway / Wing of Highways Department. concerned department?
Totally 855 Quality Control Tests had been conducted for the above works. Test Results had been conducted at Highways Research Station, Regional Lab, Thanjavur for Steel, Concrete, Bituminous Layers.
No. The cracks in the Bituminous Surface For rectifying the mistake, and in the Reinforced Earth Wall, had whether the contractor been rectified by the remedial 4 measures advised by experts from IIT, claimed any extra amount and whether it has been Madras, by grouting works to strengthen paid? the soil.
The Contractor has not claimed any extra amount and the Contractor has not been paid. Moreover, the Contractor's 2 ½ % security deposit amount is with the department. 5 Whether any arbitral No arbitral proceeding is pending before proceedings are pending? any Forum.
3. Mr.R.Imayaraja, Assistant Engineer, Highways Department, on behalf of the deponent / third respondent is personally present before this http://www.judis.nic.in 6 Court and assured that periodical and qualitative maintenance of the road will be done and it would be an all weather road. He further assured that necessary photographs and videographs would also be taken, stage by stage and preserved as “long disposal case” (L.Dis). The said submission, on instructions, is placed on record.
4. This Court has also suggested to the Highways Department, attached to Public Works Department to undertake similar kind of exercise in respect of all roads of the State Highways, which are being laid or periodically overhauled and the learned Special Government Pleader also undertakes to instruct the officials concerned to do the needful.
5. In the light of the above developments, this Court is of the view that nothing survives for further adjudication in this writ petition and the same is accordingly, closed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[M.S.N., J.] [B.P., J.]
15.07.2019
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
gk/dsk
http://www.judis.nic.in
7
To
1.The Chief Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Highways Department, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Chief Engineer, Highways Department, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.
4.The District Collector, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.
5.The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Thanjavur.
6.The Director, Directorate of Vigilance & Anti-Corruption, No.293, M.K.N.Road, Alandur, Chennai – 600 016.
http://www.judis.nic.in 8 M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.
and B.PUGALENDHI, J.
gk/dsk W.P.(MD)No.21917 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD)No.18235 of 2017 15.07.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in