Karnataka High Court
Aishwaryagiri Constructions Pvt Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 January, 2024
Author: M. Nagaprasanna
Bench: M. Nagaprasanna
1
Reserved on : 12.01.2024
Pronounced on : 23.01.2024
R
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.23054 OF 2022 (GM - SLUM)
BETWEEN:
AISHWARYAGIRI CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,
NO.1/4, UNIT NO.F2
2ND FLOOR, 10TH CROSS
4TH MAIN ROAD, M.C.LAYOUT
BENGALURU - 560 040
REPT. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
SRI. JAYARAMAIAH
REGD. UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI D.R.RAVISHANKAR, SR.ADVOCATE FOR
SRI SARAVANA S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
VIKASA SOUDHA
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU - 560 001
REPT. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. THE STATE LEVEL SANCTIONING
AND MONITORING COMMITTEE
2
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BENGALURU - 560 001
REPT. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY.
3. THE COMMISSIONER
KARNATAKA SLUM DEVELOPMENT BOARD
NO.5, ABHAYA COMPLEX
RISALDAR STREET
SHESHADRIPURAM
BENGALURU - 560 020.
4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
ESTATE DIVISON
KARNATAKA SLUM DEVELOPMENT BOARD
NO.5, ABHAYA COMPLEX
RISALDAR STREET
SHESHADRIPURAM
BENGALURU - 560 020.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE, HCGP FOR R-1 AND R-2;
SRI K.SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, SR.ADVOCATE A/W
SRI B.B.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 AND R-4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ANNEXURE -M,
M1 AND M2 THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE R3 DATED 17.10.2022,
REJECTING THE REPRESENTATION, DATED 06.09.2021, 07.09.2021
AS PER ANNEXURE-G, G1 AND G2; DIRECTING THE R3 TO EXTEND
TIME PERIOD AND CONCLUDE THE WORK ORDER IN TERMS OF
WORK ORDERS DATED 28.09.2015, 18.10.2014 AND 23.08.2017,
ANNEXURE-A, B AND C.
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR ORDERS ON 12.01.2024, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
3
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question order dated 17-10-2022 passed by the 3rd respondent/Karnataka Slum Development Board ('the Board' for short) rejecting the representations of the petitioner dated 06-09-2021 and 07-09-2021 and seeks a consequential direction directing the 3rd respondent to extend the time to conclude the work allotted to it in terms of three work orders dated 18-10-2014, 28-09-2015 and 23-08-2017.
2. Heard Sri D.R. Ravishankar, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri Spoorthy Hegde, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri K. Shashikiran Shetty, learned Advocate General appearing for respondents 3 and 4.
3. Brief facts that lead the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition, as borne out from the pleadings are as follows:
The petitioner claims to be a construction company involved in construction of dwelling houses and claims to be the recipient of 4 tenders from the hands of the 3rd respondent/Board on several occasions. The Board enters into a contract with the petitioner on 05-03-2016 pursuant to notification issued and the petitioner emerging as the successful bidder - L1 for construction of rehabilitation of dwelling houses for the slum dwellers floated by the Board. The work orders were said to have been issued to the petitioner on two dates viz., 05-03-2016 and 23-08-2017. The petitioner did not complete the project as was necessary under the contract which led the Board on 07-03-2018 to grant extension for a period of 654 days from the date on which the plots were given to its possession. The petitioner did not complete the project even then. Another extension was granted on 13-07-2020 for a period of one year viz., 365 days. On 27-07-2021 the contract awarded to the petitioner comes to be terminated. The petitioner then submits representations for grant of six months time to complete the entire award of work. Those representations were not considered and, therefore, three writ petitions, Writ Petition No.17531 of 2021, W.P.No.17536 of 2021 and W.P.No.17534 of 2021, were preferred before this Court. This Court disposed of all the writ petitions on 06-09-2022 directing consideration of those representations. On 5 certain clarification, review petitions were preferred which also come to be turned down as the direction had already been issued to consider those representations. The result of the direction for consideration of the representations is the impugned order dated 17-10-2022. It is this order that has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.
4. The learned senior counsel Sri D.R. Ravishankar appearing for the petitioner would contend with vehemence that the petitioner has no doubt short completed the work allotted to it, but the termination happens unmindful of extension of term for completion of the contract by the 3rd respondent. It is the 3rd respondent who has not allotted the sites for construction well in time. If complete allotment had been done, there would have been no impediment for the petitioner to complete the work. He would seek a direction by quashment of the impugned order rejecting the representation, permitting reasonable time to conclude the work that is pending to be completed. It is his submission that the same work is now sought to be executed at two times the price that the petitioner would complete it. Therefore, it is a loss to the exchequer of the 6 Board, as the petitioner is ready and willing to complete it within a time frame stipulated by this Court.
5. On the other hand, the learned Advocate General Sri Shashikiran Shetty appearing for the Board would vehemently refute the submissions to contend that the petitioner has been dodging the construction. Extension has been given not once but twice. Even after the third extension, the petitioner has not been able to fulfill the conditions of contract. Therefore, no indulgence to be shown to the petitioner which has even today faltered on construction. He would take this Court through the documents appended to the petition and seeks to demonstrate that the petitioner has left most of the houses half constructed and these are houses to be constructed for poor people. Because of the action of the petitioner, the slum dwellers have themselves come forward to contribute a part of the share to complete the construction. He would submit that persons like the petitioners should not be shown any indulgence with any direction at the hands of this Court. It is his emphatic submission that the order of termination of contract on 27-07-2021 was challenged in the earlier 7 writ petitions wherein this Court has not interfered with the termination. This Court only directed consideration of the representation. Therefore, the order of termination even today subsists as it is not challenged in the subject petition also. Pursuant to termination of contract, the Board has called for fresh tender and work order was about to be handed over to the successful tenderer for completing the work. Even that is not challenged, despite a tender notification is already issued for the same work. On the aforesaid score, he would seek dismissal of the petition.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record.
7. The afore-narrated facts though not in dispute would require a little elaboration. A tender notification comes to be issued by the Board for the purpose of construction of dwelling houses for slum dwellers which come under the precincts of the Board. The tender was to be awarded on package basis. The first package was 8 for construction of 543 ground floor units in seven slums in Rajarajeswarinagara Area Project. The second package was construction of 575 ground floor units and the third package was for construction of 860 ground floor units. Work orders were issued on 18-10-2014, 28-09-2015 and 23-08-2017. In all these packages maximum time limit for completion of work was stipulated to be 24 months. The contract was signed between the parties after issuance of the work order in three separate documents. These are undisputed facts. The petitioner did not complete the work but represented to the respondents seeking extension of time for completion of work. Proceedings were undertaken by the Board on 07-03-2018 wherein a decision was taken to grant extension for completion of work to the petitioner for a period of two years. The decision so taken is as follows:
"¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀvÀæ ¸ÀASÉå. HUD/15/MCS/83, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 09.06.1986 gÀ°è ¸ÀPÁðgÀ¢AzÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½/ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ C¢üPÁjUÀ½UÉ ¥ÀævÁåAiÉÆÃf¹gÀĪÀ C¢üPÁgÀ ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ£ÀĸÁgÀ F PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ C£ÀĪÉÆâ¸À®Ä CªÀPÁ±À«gÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
Item Limits of Power
No.
Nature of Board Secretary Executive
Power (Chief Engineer
Executive
of the
Board)
9
To grant Upto 75% Up to 50%
extension of of the of the
time beyond total total
the date period period
stipulated in stipulated stipulated
the contract in the in the
agreement for contract contract
completion of agreement agreement
public works for for
to contractor completion completion
in the of works of works
Full
following in respect in respect
Powers
9(ii) circumstances. of contract of contract
accepted accepted
When the by all by all
progress of authorities authorities
the work is other than other than
obstructed by KSCB or KSCB or
nature Govt. Govt.
calamities OR
by any action
on the part of
the Board.
G¥À - ªÀÄÄRå C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ°è ²¥sÁgÀ¸ÀÄì ªÀiÁrPÉÆArgÀĪÀAvÉ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÀÆtðUÉƽ¸ÀĪÀ°è GAmÁzÀ PÁ® «¼ÀA§PÉÌ UÀÄwÛUÉzÁgÀgÀÄ dªÁ¨ÁÝgÀgÁV®èzÀ PÁgÀt, ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀvÀæ ¸ÀASÉå. HUD/15/MCS/83, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 09.06.1986 gÀ°è ¸ÀPÁðgÀ¢AzÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½/ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ C¢üPÁjUÀ½UÉ ¥ÀævÁåAiÉÆÃf¹gÀĪÀ C¢üPÁgÀ ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ£ÀĸÁgÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ: 19.02.2017 jAzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ:
30.06.2018gÀªÀgÉUÉ MlÄÖ 497 ¢£ÀUÀ½UÉ zÀAqÀ gÀ»vÀ PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢ü «¸ÀÛgÀuÉUÉ C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É ¤ÃqÀ®Ä ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸À¨sÉUÉ ªÀÄAr¹zÉ. «ªÀgÀUÀ¼ÀÄ PɼÀPÀAqÀAwzÉ.
PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ UÀÄwÛUÉ UÀÄwÛUÉ ªÉÆvÀÛ PÀgÁj£ÀAvÉ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ ¥ÀÆtð¥ÀæªÀiÁtzÀ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ zÁgÀgÀ gÀÆ.®PÀëUÀ¼À°è PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸ÀܼÀªÀ£ÀÄß PÁªÀÄUÁj ¸ÀܼÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¥ÀÆtðUÉƽ¸ÀĪÀ «¼ÀA§zÀ CªÀ¢ü ºÉ¸ÀgÀÄ ºÀ¸ÁÛAvÀj¹zÀ ¤ÃrzÀ ¢£À¢AzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ: ºÁUÀÆ ¢£ÁAPÀ: PÁªÀÄUÁj C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É ¥ÀÆtðUÉƽ¸À¨ÉÃPÁzÀ ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ: «¸ÀÛgÀuÉ CªÀ¢ü ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ 19.02.2015=60 ªÉÄ|| £ÀUÀgÀzÀ ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ (¢£ÁAPÀ:19.02.2017 L±ÀéAiÀÄðVj 2942.33 ±ÁAw£ÀUÀgÀ 06.11.2016 18.04.2015=40 18.2.2017 30.06.2018 jAzÀ 30.06.2018) ¥ÉæöʪÉmï ®PÀëUÀ¼ÀÄ «zsÁ£À¸À¨sÁ ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ 497 ¢£ÀUÀ¼ÄÀ °«ÄmÉqï PÉëÃvÀæ 30.06.2015=68 10 ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ §gÀĪÀ 12.08.2015=27 J¯ï.Dgï.£ÀUÀgÀ ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ PÉƼÀZÉ 30.10.2015=12 ¥ÀæzÉñÀzÀ°è ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ 524(a) 10.01.2016=81 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼À ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ ¤ªÀiÁðt 10.08.2016=129 PÁªÀÄUÁj ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ 18.02.2016=2 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ 02.05.2017=11 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ Total Houses 430 ¤tðAiÀÄ:-
C£ÀĪÉÆâ¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ.
PÀæªÀÄ: vÁAwæPÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ-2, G.ªÀÄÄ.C., r.¹.E «¨sÁUÀ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ,."
..... .... ....
"ªÉÄîÌAqÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÀªÀÄä CªÀUÁºÀ£ÉUÉ vÀgÀÄvÁÛ, UÀÄwÛUÉ PÀgÁj£À£éÀAiÀÄ PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢üAiÀÄ£ÀÄß «¸ÀÛj¸À®Ä CªÀPÁ±À«gÀÄvÀÛzÉ UÀÄwÛUÉzÁgÀjUÉ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ ¸ÀܼÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß ºÀ¸ÁÛAvÀj¸À®Ä E¯ÁSÉ ªÀw¬ÄAzÀ «¼ÀA¨sÀªÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ zÀAqÀ gÀ»vÀªÁV PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢üAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ «¸ÀÛj¸À§ºÀÄzÁVzÉ.
PÀgÁj£ÀAvÉ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄÄ
UÀÄwÛUÉ PÀgÁj£À PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß CªÀ¢üAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ
M¥ÀàAzÀzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ ¥ÀÆtðUÉƽ¹¨ÉÃPÁVzÀÝ «¸ÀÛj¸À¨ÉÃPÁzÀ «¼ÀA¨sÀzÀ CªÀ¢ü
¢£ÁAPÀ: CªÀ¢ü
14.02.2017 jAzÀ 21 wAUÀ¼ÀÄ CxÀªÁ
15.02.2015 14.02.2017
30.11.2018 654 ¢£ÀUÀ¼ÄÀ
ªÉÄîÌAqÀAvÉ ¢£ÁAPÀ:14.02.2017 jAzÀ 31.11.2018 gÀªÀgÉUÉ MlÄÖ 654 ¢£ÀUÀ¼ÄÀ PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢ü «¸ÀÛgÀuÉ ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÁVzÀÄÝ, ¸ÀzÀj «¸ÀÛgÀuÉAiÀÄ C¢üPÁgÀªÀÅ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ ªÁå¦ÛUÉ §gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. DzÀÄzÀjAzÀ ¸ÀzÀj 654 ¢ªÀ¸ÀUÀ½UÉ zÀAqÀ gÀ»vÀ PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢ü «¸ÀÛgÀuÉ (Extention of Time) ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸À¨ÉsAiÀÄ C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£ÉUÉ ªÀÄAr¹zÉ.11
"¤tðAiÀÄ:-
C£ÀĪÉÆâ¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ.
PÀæªÀÄ: vÁAwæPÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ-2, PÁ.¥Á.C. J¸ÉÖÃmï «¨sÁUÀ., ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ,.
«µÀAiÀÄ ¸ÀASÉå: 76 «µÀAiÀÄ: ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀzÀ gÁdgÁeÉñÀéj£ÀUÀgÀ «zsÁ£À¸À¨Ás PÉëÃvÀæzÀ ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ°è §gÀĪÀ eÁ®ºÀ½î/ eÉ.¦.¥ÁPïð ªÁqïð ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ°è gÁfêï CªÁ¸ï AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄr ªÀÄÆ®¨sÀÆvÀ ¸Ë®¨sÀåUÀ¼ÉÆA¢UÉ CQÌAiÀÄ¥Àà UÁqïð£ï PÉƼÀZÉ ¥ÀæzÉñÀzÀ°è 242 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ½, gÁªÀĨsÉÆë ¥ÀæzÉñÀzÀ°è 104 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ, ¥ÀÆuÁð¥ÀÄgÀ ¥ÀæzÉñÀzÀ°è 101 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ, & ¦Ãtå ºÀjd£À PÁ¯ÉÆä (PÉgÉ MvÀÄÛªÀjAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ ©.gÁªÀiAiÀÄå PÁ¯ÉÆä¬ÄAzÀ ¸ÀܼÁAvÀgÀUÉÆAqÀ) 96 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ MlÄÖ 543 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß gÁfêï DªÁ¸ï AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄrAiÀÄ°è ¤«Äð¸ÀĪÀ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢ü «¸ÀÛgÀuÉ (Extension of time) ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£É ¸À°è¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
* * * * * ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀzÀ gÁdgÁeÉñÀéj£ÀUÀgÀ «zsÁ£À¸À¨Ás PÉëÃvÀæzÀ ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ°è §gÀĪÀ eÁ®ºÀ½î / eÉ.¦.¥ÁPïð ªÁqïð ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ°è gÁfêï CªÁ¸ï AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄr ªÀÄÆ®¨sÆ À vÀ ¸Ë®¨sÀåUÀ¼ÉÆA¢UÉ CQÌAiÀÄ¥Àà UÁqÀð£ï PÉƼÀZÉ ¥ÀæzÉñÀzÀ°è 242 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ½, gÁªÀĨsÉÆë ¥ÀæzÉñÀzÀ°è 104 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ, ¥ÀÆuÁð¥ÀÄgÀ ¥ÀæzÉñÀzÀ°è 101 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ, & ¦Ãtå ºÀjd£À PÁ¯ÉÆä (PÉgÉ MvÀÄÛªÀjAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ ©.gÁªÀÄAiÀÄå PÁ¯ÉÆä¬ÄAzÀ ¸ÀܼÁAvÀgÀUÉÆAqÀ) 96 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ MlÄÖ 543 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß gÁfêï DªÁ¸ï AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄrAiÀÄ°è ¤«Äð¸ÀĪÀ PÁªÀÄUÁjUÉ ¸ÀA¨sÀA¢¹zÀAvÉ «ªÀgÀUÀ¼ÀÄ F PɼÀPÀAqÀAwªÉ."
.... .... ....
"¸ÀzÀj PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÀÆtðUÉƽ¸À®Ä «¼ÀA¨sÀPÉÌ PÁgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß PÁAiÀÄð¥Á®PÀ C¨sÀAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ J¸ÉÖÃmï «¨sÁUÀ, PÀ£ÁðlPÀ PÉƼÀUÉÃj C©üªÀÈ¢Þ ªÀÄAqÀ½, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ gÀªÀgÀ ¥ÀvæÀ ¸ÀASÉå:PÀPÉÆCªÀÄ/J.«/PÁ.C/¨ÉA/2017-18/ ¢£ÁAPÀ :23.02.2018gÀ°è «ªÀj¹zÀÄÝ, PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¢£ÁAPÀ:06.04.2015 gÀAzÀÄ ¥ÁægÀA©ü¹, PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ ¸ÀܼÀªÀ£ÀÄß ºÀAvÀ- ºÀAvÀªÁV ¢£ÁAPÀ:05.10.2016 gÀªÀgÉUÉ 176 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ªÀ»¹PÉÆqÀ¯ÁVzÀÄÝ UÀAUÉÆAqÀ£ÀºÀ½î PÉƼÀZÉ ¥ÀæzÉñÀzÀ°è 24 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼À PÁªÀÄUÁj ¥ÁægÀA©ü¸À¨ÉÃPÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. C£ÀéAiÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:06.10.2016 jAzÀ 06.10.2018 gÀªÀgÉUÉ 730 ¢£ÀUÀ¼À CªÀ¢üUÉ zÀAqÀ gÀ»vÀ PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢ü «¸ÀÛgÀuÉ ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ PÉÆÃjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
¸ÀzÀj PÁªÀÄUÁj «¼ÀA§PÉÌ PÁgÀtUÀ¼ÀÄ F PɼÀPÀAqÀAwgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. 12
• ¸ÀzÀj PÉƼÀZÉ ¥ÀæzÉñÀªÀÅ £ÀUÀgÀzÀ PÉÃAzÀæ¨Ás UÀzÀ°èzÄÀ Ý, ¸ÀzÀj ¥ÀæzÉñÀzÀ d£ÀgÄÀ PÀÆ° PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁr fêÀ£À ¸ÁV¸ÀÄwÛzÀÄÝ, ¥sÀ¯Á£ÀĨsÀ«UÀ½UÉ vÁvÁÌ°PÀ ²©gÀ MzÀV¸À®Ä ¸ÀܼÀzÀ C¨sÁªÀ«gÀÄvÀÛzÉ ºÁUÀÆ ¥sÀ¯Á£ÀĨsÀ«UÀ½UÉ ¥ÀgÁåAiÀĪÁV ¨ÁrUÉ ªÀÄ£ÉUÉ ¸ÀܼÁAvÀgÀ ºÉÆAzÀ®Ä ¨ÁrUÉ ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼À ®¨sÀåvÉAiÀÄ PÉÆgÀvɬÄgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
F PÁgÀt¢AzÁV UÀÄwÛUÉzÁgÀjUÉ ¥sÀ¯Á£ÀĨsÀ«UÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÉgÀªÀÅUÉƽ¹zÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ ºÀAvÀ ºÀAvÀªÁV ¤ªÉñÀ£ÀªÀ£ÀÄß ºÀ¸ÁÛAvÀgÀ ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ºÀ¸ÁÛAvÀgÀzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀUÀ¼À£ÄÀ ß «ªÀgÀªÁV PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢ «¸ÀÛgÀuÉ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ°è £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¸À¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
ªÉÄÃ¯É «ªÀj¹gÀĪÀ PÁgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀéAiÀÄ ªÀ¸Àw AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß UÀÄwÛUÉ PÀgÁj£ÀéAiÀÄ ¤UÀ¢üvÀ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è ¤«Äð¸ÀĪÀ PÁ®«Äw «ÄÃjgÀĪÀ «¼ÀA§PÉÌ UÀÄwÛUÉzÁgÀjAzÀ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà jÃwAiÀÄ «¼ÀA¨sÀ«gÀĪÀÅ¢®è. PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢üAiÀÄÄ ªÉÄÃ¯É «ªÀj¹gÀĪÀ ªÁ¸ÀÛªÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼À PÁgÀt¢AzÀ «¸ÀÛgÀuÉ ºÉÆA¢zÀÄÝ, ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ°è ¸ÀÆa¹gÀĪÀ 730 ¢ªÀ¸ÀUÀ¼À PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢ü «¸ÀÛgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß zÀAqÀ gÀ»vÀªÁV «¸ÀÛj¸ÀĪÀAvÉ PÉÆÃj PÁAiÀÄð¥Á®PÀ C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ, J¸ÉÖÃmï D¦üøï PÀPÉÆCªÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ gÀªÀgÀÄ ¸À°è¹zÀÄÝ, CzÀgÀAvÉ ¢£ÁAPÀ:06.10.2016 jAzÀ 06.10.2018 gÀªÀgÉUÉ MlÄÖ 730 ¢ªÀ¸ÀUÀ½UÉ zÀAqÀgÀ»vÀ PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢ü «¸ÀÛgÀuÉ ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ PÉÆÃjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
PÁªÀÄUÁjUÀ¼À PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢ü «¸ÀÛgÀuÉAiÀÄ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ°è ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀ «ªÀgÀUÀ¼ÄÀ PɼÀPÀAqÀAwªÉ:-
PÀæ.¸ÀA UÀÄwÛUÉ PÀgÁj£ÀAvÉ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÀÆtðUÉƽ¸À®Ä «¼ÀA§zÀ ¥ÀÆtðUÉƽ¸À¨ÉÃPÁzÀ PÉÆÃjgÀĪÀ CªÀ¢ü ¢£ÁAPÀ: ¢£ÁAPÀ:
1 05.10.2016 06.10.2018 730 ¢£ÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀvÀæ ¸ÀASÉå: HUD/289/MCS/86, ¢£ÁAPÀ:05.01.1987 gÀ°è ¸ÀPÁðgÀ¢AzÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½ CxÀªÁ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ C¢üPÁjUÀ½UÉ ¥ÀævÁåAiÉÆÃf¸À¯ÁVgÀĪÀ C¢üPÁgÀ ªÁå¦Û C£ÀĸÁgÀ UÀÄwÛUÉ CªÀ¢ü «¸ÀÛgÀuÉ PÀÄjvÀÄ PɼÀPÀAqÀ ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¸À¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ: (¥Àæw ®UÀwÛ¹zÉ) Nature of power Limits of Power Item Board Commissioner Executive No. Engineer 9 To grant Full Powers Up to 75% of Up to 50% extension of time the total of the total behind the date period period stipulated in the stipulated in stipulated in contract the contract the contract 13 agreement for agreement agreement completion of for for public works to completion of completion contract in the works in of works in following respect of respect of circumstances. contract contract XIII.When there accepted by accepted by is delay on the all authorities all part of the Govt. other than authorities to supply KSCB or other than controlled Govt. KSCB or materials and Govt.
OR XIV. When the progress of the work is obstructed by nature calamities OR by any action on the part of the Board.
ªÉÄîÌAqÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÀªÀÄä CªÀUÁºÀ£ÉUÉ vÀgÀÄvÁÛ, UÀÄwÛUÉ PÀgÁj£À£ÀéAiÀÄ PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢üAiÀÄ£ÀÄß «¸ÀÛj¸À®Ä UÀÄwÛUÉ PÀgÁj£À PÁè¸ï 2.4.3 (PWG-65)gÀ°è CªÀPÁ±À«gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ¸ÀzÀj AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄr ªÉÄÃ¯É «ªÀj¹gÀĪÀ «ªÀgÀuÉUÀ¼À£ÀéAiÀÄ ºÀAvÀºÀAvÀªÁV ¤ªÉñÀ£ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß UÀÄwÛUÉzÁgÀjUÉ ºÀ¸ÁÛAvÀj¹zÀÄÝ ¥ÀÆtð ¥ÀæªÀiÁtzÀ°è ¤ªÉñÀ£À ¤ÃqÀĪÀ°è E¯ÁSÁªÀw¬ÄAzÀ «¼ÀA§ªÁVgÀĪÀ PÁgÀt ¸ÀzÀj PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢ü «¸ÀÛgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß zÀAqÀ gÀ»vÀªÁV PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢üAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ «¸ÀÛj¸À§ºÀÄzÁVzÉ. UÀÄwÛUÉ PÀgÁj£À M¥ÀàAzÀzÀ PÀgÁj£ÀAvÉ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ «¼ÀA¨sÀzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ PÀªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß CªÀ¢üAiÀÄ£ÀÄß CªÀ¢ü ¥ÀÆtðUÉƽ¹¨ÉÃPÁVzÀÝ «¸ÀÛj¸À¨ÉÃPÁzÀ CªÀ¢ü ¢£ÁAPÀ:
26.09.2014 06.04.2015 ¤ªÉñÀ£À 06.10.2016 jAzÀ 730 ¢£ÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ºÀ¸ÁÛAvÀgÀzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ 06.10.2018 ¢AzÀ 18 wAUÀ¼ÀÄ ªÉÄîÌAqÀAvÉ ¢£ÁAPÀ: 06.10.2016 jAzÀ 06.10.2018 gÀªÀgÉUÉ 730 ¢£ÀUÀ¼ÀAiÀÄÄ PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢ü «¸ÀÛgÀuÉ ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÁVzÀÄÝ, ¸ÀzÀj «¸ÀÛgÀuÉAiÀÄ C¢üPÁgÀªÀÅ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄ ªÁå¦ÛUÉ §gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. DzÀÄzÀjAzÀ ¸ÀzÀj PÁªÀÄUÁjUÉ 730 ¢£ÀUÀ¼ÀÄ zÀAqÀ gÀ»vÀ PÁ¯ÁªÀ¢ü «¸ÀÛgÀuÉ (Extention of Time) ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀÄAqÀ½ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ C£ÀÄAiÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£ÉUÉ ªÀÄAr¹zÉ.14
¤tðAiÀÄ:-
C£ÀĪÉÆâ¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ.
PÀæªÀÄ: vÁAwæPÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ-2, PÁ.¥Á.C. J¸ÉÖÃmï «¨sÁUÀ., ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ."
(Emphasis added) The petitioner failed to complete the work on the extension so granted in terms of resolution of the Board. The petitioner again represents to the Board seeking extension of time. The Board meets on 13-03-2020 and grants extension which reads as follows:
"¤tðAiÀÄ:
ªÀiÁ£Àå ªÀ¸Àw ¸ÀaªÀgÀ DzÉñÀzÀ C£ÀéAiÀÄ G½PÉ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÀÆtðUÉƽ¸À¨ÉÃPÁVgÀĪÀ »£É߯ÉAiÀÄ°è PÁAiÀÄð¥Á®PÀ C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ £ÀA-3£Éà «¨sÁUÀ ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ gÀªÀgÀÄ w½¹gÀĪÀAvÉ UÀÄwÛUÉzÁgÀgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀA¨sÀAzÀ¥ÀlÖ ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÁAiÀÄð¥Á®PÀ C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ ºÁUÀÄ ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ ¸ÀܽÃAiÀÄ d£À¥Àæw¤¢üUÀ¼ÉÆA¢UÉ ZÀað¹, UÀªÀÄ£ÀPÉÌ vÀAzÀÄ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÁægÀA©ü¸À®Ä ¸ÀÆa¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ««zsÀ ºÀAvÀzÀ°ègÀĪÀ 154 ªÀÄ£ÉUÀ¼À PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸ÀA¥ÀÆtðªÁV ¥ÀÆtðUÉƽ¹zÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÁAiÀÄð¥Á®PÀ C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ UÀÄwÛUÉzÁgÀgÀ PÁªÀiUÁjUÀ¼À ¥ÀæUÀw ºÁUÀÆ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ UÀÄt ªÀÄlÖzÀ §UÉÎ RavÀ ¥Àr¹PÉÆAqÀÄ, Pending ©¯ï §UÉÎ PÀæªÀÄ ªÀ»¸À§ºÀÄzÉAzÀÄ wêÀiÁð¤¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ. CzÀgÀAvÉ, ¸ÀzÀj ¤tðAiÀÄzÀAvÉ PÀæªÀÄ ªÀ»¸À®Ä UÀÄwÛUÉzÁgÀgÁzÀ M/s.Aishwaryagiri Constructions Pvt. Ltd gÀªÀjUÉ ¸ÀÆa¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ."
..... .... .....
"¤tðAiÀÄ:
ªÀiÁ£Àå ªÀ¸Àw ¸ÀaªÀgÀ DzÉñÀzÀ C£ÀéAiÀÄ G½PÉ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß
¥ÀÆtðUÉƽ¸À¨ÉÃPÁjVgÀĪÀ »£É߯ÉAiÀÄ°è ¸ÀA§Az¥ÀlÖ ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ sÀPÁAiÀÄð¥Á®PÀ C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ QjAiÀÄ C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ ®UÉÎgÉ G¥À-«¨sÁUÀ gÀªÀgÀÄ ¸ÀܽAiÀÄ d£À¥Àæw¤¢üUÀ¼ÉÆA¢UÉ ZÀað¹ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÁægÀA©ü¸À®Ä ¸ÀÆa¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ. ¸ÀºÁAiÀÄPÀ PÁAiÀÄð¥Á®PÀ C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ QjAiÀÄ C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ PÁªÀiUÁjUÀ¼À ¥ÀæUÀw ºÁUÀÆ PÁªÀÄUÁjAiÀÄ UÀÄt ªÀÄlÖzÀ §UÉÎ RavÀ ¥Àr¹PÉÆAqÀÄ, £ÀAvÀgÀ, Pending ©¯ï §UÉÎ PÀæªÀÄ ªÀ»¸À®Ä wêÀiÁð¤¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ. ¸ÀzÀj 15 ¤tðAiÀÄzÀAvÉ PÀæªÀÄ ªÀ»¸À®Ä UÀÄwÛUÉzÁgÀgÁzÀ M/s.Aishwaryagiri Constructions Pvt. Ltd gÀªÀjUÉ ¸ÀÆa¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ."
(Emphasis added) The petitioner even then did not complete the construction. The construction remained to be completed. The 3rd respondent/Board on 27-07-2021 being fed up of granting extensions terminated the contract. The order of termination reads as follows:
" ೆ.
ೕ.ಜಯ ಾಮಯ . .
. ಐಶ ರಯ ಕನ ೆ. .
ನಂ.236,ಇ.ಡಬು$%. ಎ'. 2(ೇ ಹಂತ,
2(ೇ ಮುಖ ರ,ೆ-, 5(ೇ .ರುವ0, 1ೆ.2ೆ3.4.1ಾ.5ೋ7, ಬಸ9ೇಶ ರ ನಗರ, ;ೆಂಗಳ=ರು.
"(ೊಂದ? @ ೕಕೃತ ಅಂCೆ" - RPAD Dಾನ ೆ, Fಷಯ:- ಾ ೕH ಆ9ಾ' Jೕಜ(ೆಯK ;ೆಂಗಳ=ರು ನಗರದ ಾಜ ಾLೇಶ ನಗರ FMಾನಸNಾ Oೇತ ದ 9ಾ P-ಯ $ FMಾನಸNಾ Oೇತ ದ 9ಾ P-ಯ $ ಮೂಲಭೂತ ,ೌಲಭ ಗTೆ= ಂU ೆ FFಧ 1ೊಳ ೇ ಪ Xೇಶಗಳ $ (ಅYZಯಪ[ ಾಡ -242, ಪ\]ಾ ಪ0ರ-101, ಹ ಜನ 1ಾ5ೋ7-96 ಮತು- ಾಮNೋF 1ಾ5ೋ7-104 ಮ(ೆಗಳ^) ಒಟುa 543 ಮ(ೆಗಳ 7Dಾ ಣ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯ cೆಂಡd ಅನುe ರದುಪKಸುವ ಬ ೆf.
ಉ5ೆ$ೕಖ: 1. 1ಾಮ ಾ 1ಾhಾ೯ 1ಾhಾ೯Xೇಶ ಸಂjೆ : KSDB /COMMR/TD-1 / DCE / FA-1 / RAY / P-I /2ND CALL/WO/2015-16/ 25 Dated-28-09-2015.16
2. Dಾನ ಆಯುಕ-ರು, ಕ1ೊಅಮ, ;ೆಂಗಳ=ರು ರವರ ಅಂ.ಮ .ಳ^ವk1ೆ ಪತ ಸಂjೆ 428/602/2018-19 U(ಾಂಕ:30.11.2018
3. U(ಾಂಕ:17/03/2021ರಂದು ನlೆದ ಮಂಡk ಸNೆ Fಷಯ ಸಂjೆ 9
4. U(ಾಂಕ::12/04/2021 ರಂದು ನlೆದ 27(ೇ ಎ'.ಎn.ಎಂ.@ ಸNೆ (Continuation meeting on 15/04/2021 at 2.30PM ) ಯ Fಷಯ ಸಂjೆ :26
5. 1ಾಯ ಾಲಕ ಅoಯಂತರರು ನಂ.3(ೇ FNಾಗ, ಕ1ೊಅಮ, ;ೆಂಗಳ=ರು ರವರ ಪತ ಸಂjೆ : ಕ1ೊಅಮ/1ಾ ಾಅ/ ನಂ.3(ೇ.F/2021-22 U(ಾಂಕ: 26/07/2021.
ೕಲZಂಡ Fಷಯ1ೆZ ಸಂಬಂp@ದಂqೆ ಉ5ೆ$ೕಖ (1)ರ ಅನ ಯ ಾ ೕH ಆ9ಾ' Jೕಜ(ೆಯKಯ $ ;ೆಂಗಳ=ರು ನಗರದ ಾಜ ಾLೇಶ ನಗರದ FMಾನಸNಾ Oೇತ ದ 9ಾ P-ಯ $ FFಧ 1ೊಳ ೇ ಪ XೇಶಗTಾದ ಅYZಯಪ[ ಾಡ -242, ಪ\]ಾ ಪ0ರ-101, ಹ ಜನ 1ಾ5ೋ7-96 ಮತು- ಾಮNೋF 1ಾ5ೋ7 -104 ಒಟುa 543 ಮ(ೆಗಳ 7Dಾ ಣ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯನುe ಗು.- ೆ rತ- ರೂ 3163.35 ®PÀëUÀ¼À°è 1ೈ ೊಳtಲು ತಮ ೆ 1ಾhಾ Xೇಶ 7ೕಡ5ಾ ರುತ-Xೆ. 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯನುe ಪ\ಣ ೊkಸಲು 24 .ಂಗಳ 1ಾ5ಾವ1ಾಶ 7ೕಡ5ಾ ರುತ-Xೆ.
1ಾಯ ಾಲಕ ಅoಯಂತರರ ವರUಯನ ಯ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯನುe 7ಗpತ ಅವpಯ $ ಪ\ಣ ೊkಸXೇ 2ಾಗೂ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಸu ತ ೊಂKರುವ v(ೆeಯ $ ಸ2ಾಯಕ 1ಾಯ ಾಲಕ ಅoಯಂತರರು ಲ ೆf ೆ ಉಪ FNಾಗ / 2ಾಗೂ 1ಾಯ ಾಲಕ ಅoಯಂತರರು ನಂ-3(ೇ FNಾಗಗkಂದ ಹಲ9ಾರು ಹಲ9ಾರು .ಳ^ವk1ೆ ಪತ ಗಳ ಮೂಲಕ ವರU DಾKರುವಂqೆ 2ಾಗೂ ಸ1ಾ ರ ಮಟaದ ಪ ಗ. ಪ ೕಲ(ಾ ಸNೆಗಳ $ ಕುಂwತ ಪ ಗ.ಯ ಬ ೆf ಚy ಸ5ಾ ರುವಂqೆ ಆಯುಕ-ರು ಕ1ೊಅಮ ರವರ ಅಧ qೆಯ $ U(ಾಂಕ:28-08-2018 gÀAzÀÄ £ÀqÉzÀ Project management Committee meeting ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ZÀað¹ 7ಣ z@ದಂqೆ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯನುe ಪ\ಣ ೊkಸಲು hಾವ0Xೇ ಕ ಮ 1ೈ ೊಳtXೇ ಇರುವ v(ೆe5ೆಯ $ ಸ2ಾಯಕ 1ಾಯ ಾಲಕ ಅoಯಂತರರು ;ೆಂಗಳ=ರು ನಂ-5(ೇ ಲ ೆf ೆ ಉಪ FNಾಗ 2ಾಗೂ 1ಾಯ ಾಲಕ ಅoಯಂತರು ನಂ-3(ೇ FNಾಗ ;ೆಂಗಳ=ರು ರವ ೆ cೆಂಡd ಕ ಾ ನ ೕqಾ ಸಮಗ 9ಾದ ಪ ,ಾ-ವ(ೆಯನುe (1ೆಲಸದ ಆXೇಶ U(ಾಂಕ:
ಪ\ಣ ೊkಸ;ೇ1ಾದ ೊkಸ;ೇ1ಾದ U(ಾಂಕ ಜಂw ಅಳqೆಗTೆ= ಂU ೆ ಉk1ೆ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯ Fವರ ಮಹಜd ವರUJಂU ೆ) ಉk1ೆ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯನುe ಪ\ಣ ೊkಸುವ ಬ ೆf cೆಂಡ cೆಂಡdd ಅನುe ಅಂ.ಮ ೊkಸುವ ಸಂಬಂಧ ಪ ,ಾ-ವ(ೆ ಸ ಸ $ ಲು ಸೂy@ ಗು.- ೆ ಕ ಾ ನ 7ಯಮ-50ರ 50.2(a) ರಂqೆ ಉ5ೆ$ೕಖ 2ರ U(ಾಂಕ:30.11.2018 ರ $ ಅಂ.ಮ .ಳ^ವk1ೆ ಪತ 7ೕಡ5ಾ ರುತ-Xೆ.17
50 Termination 50.1 The Employer may terminate the Contract if the other party causes a fundamental breach of the Contract.
50.2 Fundamental breaches of Contract include, but shall not be limited to the following:
a. the Contractor stops work for, 45 days when no stoppage of work is shown on the current Program and the stoppage has not been authorized by the Employer;
f. the Contractor does not maintain a security which is required;
ಸದ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯ ಪ\ಣ ೊkಸುವ 7ಗpತ 1ಾ5ಾವp U(ಾಂಕ: 30-11-2018PÉÌ ಅಂತ ೊಂKದು, ತದನಂತರವ\, hಾವ0Xೇ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಗಳ ಚಟುವw1ೆ 7ವ vಸದ v(ೆe5ೆಯ $ ಗು.- ೆXಾರರನುe 1ಾಯ ಾಲಕ ಅoಯಂತರರು ಗು.- ೆ ಕ ಾ ನ cೆಂಡd 7ಯಮ ಸಂjೆ -50ರ 50.2(a) & 51.1 ರಂqೆ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯನುe ಅಂ.ಮ ೊk¹ ೊk ಬ ೆf 2ಾಗೂ ಉk1ೆ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯನುe cೆಂಡ d ಮುjಾಂತರ 1ೈ ೊಳ^tವ ಬ ೆf ಪ ,ಾ-ವ(ೆ ಸ @ $ ದು, ಸದ ಪ ,ಾ-ವ(ೆಯನುe U(ಾಂಕ:17/03/2021ರಂದು ನlೆದ ಮಂಡk ಸNೆಯ $ Fಷಯವನುe ಮಂKಸ5ಾ ರುತ-Xೆ. ಮಂಡk ಸNೆಯು ನಡವk Fಷಯ ಸಂjೆ 09 ರ $ ಗು.- ೆ ಕ ಾ ನನ ಯ 7ಯDಾನು,ಾರ ಕ ಮ 1ೈ ೊಳtಲು .ೕDಾ 7ಸ5ಾ ರುತ-Xೆ. ಅದರಂqೆ ಸದ ಪ ,ಾ-ವ(ೆಯನುe U(ಾಂಕ: 12-04-2021 (Continuation meeting on 15-04-2021 ) gÀAzÀÄ SLSMC ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ಮಂKಸ5ಾ ದು, ಈ 1ೆಳಕಂಡಂqೆ 7ಣ zಸ5ಾ ರುತ-Xೆ.
Resolution: Committee approved the proposal of KSDB to Terminate the work -"Pkg IV-575 DUs" & "Pkg I-543 DUs" as per tender clause 50. 50.1& 50.2 (a) and cancel the tender awarded to M/s Aishwaryagiri Constructions Private Limited and to Re-tender take up the balance works (Under progress and un started houses) within the approved project cost.
ಇದರನ ಯ 1ಾಯ ಾಲಕ ಅoಯಂತರರು ನಂ. (ೇ FNಾಗ, ಕ1ೊಅಮ, ;ೆಂಗಳ=ರು ರವ ೆ ಈ ಕ|ೇ ಯ U(ಾಂಕ:25-05-2021ರ ಪತ ದ $ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯ cೆಂಡ cೆಂಡgïC£ÀÄß CAwªÀÄ 18 ಸಲು ಗು.- ೆ ಕ ಾ ನ 7ಯಮ 51. 51.1 Payment upon Termination ಅನ ಯ ಕ ಮ UÉƽಸಲು 1ೈ ೊಳtಲು ಯ}ಾ@u.ಯ $ ಪ . ಮ(ೆಯ Nೌ.ಕ ಪ ಗ.ಯ FವರಗTೆ= (ೊeಳ ೊಂಡಂqೆ ೊಂಡಂqೆ ಮತು-
ಮಹಜd ವರUJಂU ೆ 2ಾಗೂ ಉk1ೆ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಗಳ Fವರ ಮತು- ಸದ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಗಳನುe ಪ\ಣ ೊkಸಲು ;ೇ1ಾದ rತ-ದ Fವರಗಳನುe ಪ . ಮ(ೆಯ ವಸು-@.
u ಯ 7ಖರ9ಾದ ಅಳqೆಗಳನುe ನಮೂ(ೆಯ $ ಭ. DಾK ಮತು- ಕಟaಡದ $ ಫ5ಾನುಭF9ಾಸFರುವ ೇ 2ಾಗೂ ಕಟaಡದ 2ಾ •ೕcೋ Dಾv.ಯನುe ಪlೆ ಪlೆದು ದು, ಪ . 1ೊಳCೆ ಪ Xೇಶಗಳ $ ಮ(ೆಗಳ Fವರಗಳ Dಾv.ಗಳನುe 5ೇಔ• ನOೆಯ $ ಗುರು.@, ಯ}ಾ@u. Nೌ.ಕ ಪ ಗ., ಉk1ೆ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಗಳ Fವರಗಳನುe @ದ‚ಪK@ ಸ @ $ ರುqಾ- ೆ Fವರಗಳ^ 1ೆಳಕಂಡಂ.9ೆ.
ªÉÆvÀÛ gÀÆUÀ¼À°è.
ಕ. 1ೊಳ ೇ ಪ Xೇಶದ ಮ(ೆಗ ಾ ರಂo ಗು.- ೆXಾರ ೆ 9ಾಸ-ವದಂqೆ 2ೆಚುƒವ hಾ
ಸಂ 2ೆಸರು ಳ @ದ ಾವ.@ರುವ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಗು.- ೆXಾರ ೆ
ಸಂjೆ ಮ(ೆಗಳ rತ- 7ವ v@ರುವ ಾವ.@ರುವ
ಸಂjೆ rತ- rತ-
(P˨A 5-6)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 ಾಮNೋF 104 73 31449024 30187780 1261244
1ಾ5ೋ7
2 ತ?•ರು ಹಳt 12 3915850 2816258 1099592
3 ಪ\ಣ ಪ0ರ 101 33 14536493 13597325 939168
4 ಅYZಯಪ[ ಾಡ 242 150 63322923 61754575 1568348
5 Pೕಣ ಹ ಜನ 96 59 18289729 14947061 3342668
1ಾ5ೋ7
543 327 13,15,14,019/- 12,33,02,999/ 82,11,020/-
-
ೕಲZಂಡಂqೆ 1ಾಯ ಾಲಕ ಇಂ 7ಯd ರವರು ಗು.- ೆXಾರ ೆ ಒಟುa ರೂ.82,11,020/-
UÀ¼À£ÀÄß 2ೆಚುƒವ hಾ ಾವ.hಾ ರುವ0Xಾ .k@, ಸದ rತ-ವನುe ಮಂಡkಯ $
7' ಸು.-ರುವ ಇತ ೆ ವಸ.Jೕಜ(ೆಯ $ ಗು.- ೆXಾ ೆ ಾವ.ಸ;ೇ1ಾ ರುವ 4 $ನ rತ-Uಂದ /
ಗು.- ೆXಾರರು ಮಂಡk ೆ ಾವ.@ರುವ ;ಾ ಂ" ಾ ರಂwzಂದ ಭ @1ೊಳ^tವ0ದು ಎಂದು "ಾರಸು DಾKರುqಾ- ೆ.
19
2ಾಗೂ ಪ ಗ.ಯ $ರುವ 46 ಮ(ೆಗಳನುe ಪ\ಣ ೊkಸಲು ಅವಶ Fರುವ rತ- gÀÆ.61.67.497/-ಗTಾ ದು. 2018-19£Éà ,ಾ ನ ದರಪwa ೆ 2ೋ @Xಾಗ ರೂ.87.33,389/- ಗTಾ ರುತ-Xೆ. ಸದ ಉk1ೆ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಗಳನುe 1ೈ ೊಳtಲು 2ೊಸXಾ cೆಂಡd ಕ ೆದ $ 2018-19(ೇ ,ಾ ನ ದರಪwaಯಂqೆ cೆಂಡd P ೕ'ಯಂ(ೊಂU ೆ rತ-ವನುe ತಮ•Xೇ ಜ9ಾ;ಾ ಮತು- 9ೆಚƒದKಯ $ (Risk & Cost) ಭ @, 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯನುe cೆಂಡd ಕ ಾ ನಂqೆ ಪ\ಣ ೊkಸಲು ತಗಲುವ 9ೆಚƒವನುe ಸ $ಸ5ಾ ರುವ ಭದ qಾ-ೇವ?- rತ-ದ $ ಭ ಸ5ಾಗುವ0ದು. 2ಾಗೂ ಅ $ಯವ ೆ ೆ ಭದ qಾ -ೇವ? rತ-ವನುe ತlೆvKಯ5ಾಗುವ0ದು ಎಂಬ ಅಂಶಗಳನುe ತಮ• ಗಮನ1ೆZ ತರ5ಾ Xೆ. Fವರಗಳ^ 1ೆಳಕಂಡಂ.9ೆ.
..... ..... .....
ೕ5ೆ Fವ @ರುವ ಅಂಶಗಳಂqೆ U(ಾಂಕ12.04.2021 & continuation meeting on 15/04/2021 ರಂದು ನlೆದ SLSMC ಸNೆಯ 7ಣ zದಂqೆ ಾ ೕH ಆ9ಾ' Jೕಜ(ೆಯK ;ೆಂಗಳ=ರು ನಗರದ ಾಜ ಾLೇಶ ನಗರ FMಾನಸNಾ Oೇತ ದ 9ಾ P-ಯ $ ಬರುವ FMಾನಸNಾ Oೇತ ದ ಾ ೕH ಆ9ಾ' Jೕಜ(ೆಯKಯ $ ಮೂಲಭೂತ. ,ೌಲಭ ಗTೆ= ಂU ೆ FFಧ 1ೊಳ ೇ ಪ Xೇಶಗಳ $ (ಅYZಯಪ[ ಾಡ -242, ಪ\]ಾ ಪ0ರ-101, ಹ ಜನ 1ಾ5ೋ7-96 ಮತು- ಾಮNೋF 1ಾ5ೋ7 104 ಮ(ೆಗಳ^) ಒಟುa 543 ಮ(ೆಗಳ 7Dಾ ಣ 1ಾಮ ಾ ಯ cೆಂಡಅನುe ಗು.- ೆ ಕ ಾ ನ cೆಂಡd 7ಯಮ ಸಂjೆ - 50 50.1 50.2 ರಂqೆ ರದು ೊkಸ5ಾ Xೆ 2ಾಗೂ ಮರು cೆಂಡd ಕ ೆಯ5ಾಗುವ0ದು ಎಂಬುದನುe ಈ ಮೂಲಕ ತಮ ೆ .kಯಪKಸ5ಾ Xೆ.
vÀªÀÄä ನಂಬು ೆಯ.
ಸv ಆಯುಕ-ರು, ಕ(ಾ ಟಕ 1ೊಳ ೇ ಅoವೃU‚ ಮಂಡk, ;ೆಂಗಳ=ರು."
(Emphasis added) On termination of contract, the petitioner immediately approaches this Court in Writ Petition Nos. 17531 of 2021, 17534 of 2021 and 17536 of 2021. The prayer sought in one of the writ petitions, which is common in all, is as follows:
20
"WHEREFORE, the petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to :
(a) ISSUE a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash Annexure-F the termination notice issued by the 3rd respondent dated 27-07-2021 bearing No.KSDB/TD-BC/13/2021-22/875.
(b) ISSUE a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the tender notification bearing No. KSDB/2021-
22/BD/WORK-INDENT 3177 & KSDB/2021-
22/BD/WORK_INDENT 3178, dated 14-09-
2021,vide Annexure-H1 & H2.
(c) ISSUE a writ in the nature of mandamus directing
the 3rd respondent to consider the representation dated 07-09-2021 at Annexure-G; and
(d) PASS such other order or orders as deemed appropriate by this Hon'ble Court."
(Emphasis added) The petitioner challenges two actions - one seeking quashment of termination notice/order dated 27-07-2021 and the other, quashment of a subsequent tender notification dated 14-09-2021. The 3rd prayer was to consider his representation dated 07-09-2021. This Court disposed of the writ petitions by similar orders and the order passed in Writ Petition No.17531 of 2021 reads as follows:
21
"ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner having argued the matter vehemently in support of the prayers made in the petition, now submits that his client would be fairly satisfied if a direction is issued to Respondent Nos.3 & 4 to consider his representation dated 7.9.2021, in accordance with law.
2. Although the learned AGA appearing for respondent Nos.1 & 2 and the learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.3 & 4, opposed the petition, mentioning the availability of arbitration facility in terms of tender documents, learned Panel Counsel in all fairness too agrees to instruct his clients to look into the grievance of petitioner as aired in the subject representation.
In view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed off directing Respondent Nos.3 & 4 to consider petitioner's subject representation, in accordance with law and inform result of such consideration to him within an outer limit of six weeks.
All contentions are kept open.
It is open to the answering respondents to solicit any information/documents from the side of the petitioner as are required for due consideration of the said representation; however, in the guise of such solicitation, delay shall not be brooked."
(Emphasis supplied) The co-ordinate Bench observes that the petitioner having argued the matter vehemently has fairly submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondents 3 and 4 to consider its representation dated 07-09-2021 in accordance with 22 law. Based on the said submission, the writ petition was disposed of on 06-09-2022 directing consideration of the representation within six weeks and it was also left open to the respondents to solicit any information.
8. As observed hereinabove, similar orders are passed in the other writ petitions. Based upon the direction, the Board considers the representation and rejects it by an order dated 17-10-2022. After the rejection, the petitioner prefers a review petition seeking review of the orders passed in the earlier writ petitions. The review petitions come to be rejected by the following order:
"ORDER The relief was denied to the Petitioner on the ground of availability of Arbitration Clause. That is how the Judgment now put in review was structured. Despite vociferous submissions made on behalf of the Review Petitioner, no other ground is demonstrated for indulgence in Review in terms of Order XLVII Rules 1 & 2 of CPC, 1908, read with Rule 39 of the Writ Proceedings Rules, 1977. Even otherwise, no any ground for indulgence is shown. In view of the same review petition being not meritorious, is liable to be rejected and accordingly it is, costs having been made easy.
This order will not come in the way of petitioner laying a challenge to the rejection of his Representation dated 07.09.2021, in accordance with law.23
All contentions in that connection are kept open."
(Emphasis supplied) The co-ordinate Bench again holds that there was no ground for any indulgence to be shown. Liberty was however reserved to challenge the rejection of representation submitted by the petitioner on 07-09-2021. Taking cue from the order in the review petitions, the subject petition is preferred.
9. Two glaring factors that have happened in these proceedings are that, termination order dated 27-07-2021 has become final, as the co-ordinate Bench did not set aside the order of termination. It only directed consideration of the representations. Therefore, as on today, the order of termination passed against the petitioner in all contracts has become final, as the petitioner even in the subject petition does not challenge the said order of termination. What is challenged is only rejection of the representations.
24
10. Vehement submissions are made by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner need not challenge the order of termination as this Court thought it fit to direct consideration of the representation and the representation having been rejected and that having been challenged would suffice for a challenge to the order of termination. The submission is noted only to be rejected, as it is fundamentally flawed. The termination did not merge in the order rejecting the representation. The termination though challenged it is not interfered with. The two prayers that were sought as quoted supra were tacitly turned down as direction was given on prayer No.3 i.e.,(c) to consider the representation. Therefore, it is too late in the day for the contention that the termination order need not be challenged.
11. Much water has flown under the bridge after the order of termination. Three tenders were issued for the same work that the petitioner had left mid-way. They are issued on 26-08-2021, 17-11-2022 and 22-11-2022. The tenders were for a specific purpose of construction of houses and the balance work. The petitioner while filing the subject writ petition was completely aware 25 of the tenders being notified and they being notified for the balance work. The petitioner does not lay a challenge to the subsequent tender notifications, on a specious plea that he has challenged rejection of his representation and wants a direction at the hands of this Court for completion of work that is already notified by way of separate tenders. What remains in the said tenders is issuance of work order. These two circumstances are enough circumstances to deny any relief to the petitioner much less, the relief of completion of work. The photographs appended to the additional statement of facts produced by the Board depict appalling situation of the contract being left high and dry by the petitioner, as it is said, a picture is worth thousand words. The undisputed photographs produced of the houses show that they are grossly under- constructed, half-constructed or 3/4th constructed. Merely because the petitioner has constructed 60% or even 70% of houses, that would not enure to its benefit for a direction of extension to be granted to the petitioner. The details in all the three packages as produced by way of a chart by the learned Advocate General are germane to be noted. The chart is as follows: 26
"Abstract Details Sl. Name of Project No of No. of Houses Houses Incomplete Not No. Houses Slums started completed** Houses start ed Construction of 543 Ground Floor Units including infrastructure at 4 selected slum in 1 543 5 343 197 123 223 Rajarajeshwarinagara Area, Bangalore City (Package-I) Under RAY Construction of 575 Ground Floor Units including infrastructure at 2 selected slum in Rajarajeswarinagara 2 Area, Bangalore City 575 2 508 308 194 73 (Package-IV-a)-(7 Slums of 1562 Du's-
Rajarajeshwarinagara Area Project) Under Ray Construction of 860 (GF) Dwelling Units including infrastructure at 2 selected slums in Yashwanthapura 3 860 2 357 169 188 503 Constituency, Bangalore City under PMAY-HFA (Package-III) Under PMAY-HFA Total 1978 9 1208 674** 505 799 27 ***SINCE 23.05.2018 COMPLETELY STOPPED THE WORK **COMPLETED 674 DU'S FINISHING WORKS EXECUTED BY BENEFICIARIES THEMSELVES *TOTAL 1304 DU'S (505+799) not completed as per contract data"
In the first package out of 543, houses completed are 197, incomplete houses are 123 and houses not even started are 223. In the second package out of 575, houses started are 508, completed 308, incomplete are 194 and not started 73. Same goes with the third package. In total out of 1978 houses allotted for construction in 9 slums what is started is 1208, completed is 674, incomplete is 505 and not even started is 799. If this is the figure of completion of work from the petitioner, no indulgence can be shown for a direction to be issued granting extension of time to complete the work.
12. Merely because it is construction of houses for slum dwellers, a contractor or a tenderer cannot take it for granted. It is these slum dwellers who need the houses to reside, as the condition of living of slum dwellers is to be improved on a war footing. It is in that avowed objective that the Board directed rehabilitation by reconstruction of slums by building houses in those areas. 10 years 28 have passed by but construction of houses is not completed. The petitioner ought not to have dodged the completion even though extension was granted twice. It is unable to complete. The petitioner is an unwilling horse, though taken to a lake bed, is not ready to drink water. I use this metaphor to drive home that that the petitioner despite being granted time, time and again, has not completed the work. Therefore, no indulgence can be shown to the petitioner on any ground whatsoever.
13. Finding no merit in the petition, the petition stands rejected. Interim order subsisting stands dissolved. The Board is directed to issue appropriate work order and get the houses of poor slum dwellers completed within a time frame and not put the lives of those slum dwellers in jeopardy, as by now they have suffered enough.
Pending applications also stand disposed, as a consequence.
Sd/-
JUDGE Bkp