Karnataka High Court
M/S Suprada Constructions Pvt Ltd vs The Executive Engineer on 24 February, 2023
Bench: Chief Justice, Ashok S.Kinagi
-1-
WA No. 960 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
WRIT APPEAL NO. 960 OF 2022 (LB)
BETWEEN:
1. M/S SUPRADA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD
FORMALLY KNOWN AS
M/S SUPRADA CNSTRUCTIONS COMPANY
ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS
A REGISTERED COMPANY
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.34/3B
BEHIND SRIRAMA HOUSE
VINAYAKANAGAR
DHARWAD - 580 001
AND HAVING ITS ADMINISTRATIVE
OFFICE AT NO.336, 2ND FLOOR
14TH MAIN RAOD
RAJ MAHAL VILAS EXTENSION
Digitally signed SADASHIVANAGAR
by AMBIKA H B
REPTD BY ITS PARTNER
Location: HIGH
COURT OF MR.NARAYAN M SHETTY
KARNATAKA ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, SENIOR ADVOCTE FOR SRI ADITYA BHAT
AND SRI GANAPATHI SUBBARAYA BHAT.,ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PANCHAYATH RAJ ENGINEERING DIVISION
UDUPI DIVISION
UDUPI DISTRICT
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER
THE CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
KARNATAKA RURAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
2ND FLOOR, NIRMAN BHAVAN
-2-
WA No. 960 of 2022
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD
RAJAJINAGAR 1ST BLOCK
BANGALORE - 560 010
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ AND
RURAL DEVELOPMENT
M S BUILDINGS
BANGALORE - 560 001
4. SECRETARY
PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
EX-OFFICIO CHAIRMAN STANDING
EMPOWERED COMMITTEE
KARNATAKA RURAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
M S BUILDINGS
BANGALROE - 560 001
...RESPONDENTS
(SRI S.RAJASHEKAR, AGA FOR RESPONDENT Nos.1 TO 3)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
08.08.2022 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT IN WRIT PETITION No.16346/2011 AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, CHIEF
JUSICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri Vikram Huilgol, learned Senior Counsel appearing
for the appellant and the learned Additional Government Advocate
for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
2. The learned Senior Counsel submits that the appellant is
before this Court raising a very limited issue in challenge to the
order of the learned Single Judge dated 08.08.2022 and the ground
WA No. 960 of 2022
raised by the appellant is non-application of mind in the decision of
the Empowered Standing Committee in its order dated 22.01.2011.
The learned Senior Counsel was also fair enough to submit that
though this very ground in very words is not raised in the appeal,
the grounds raised in the appeal are inclusive of the ground of non-
application of mind of the Committee and the order suffering on
account of non competence of the Committee.
3. The brief facts giving rise to filing of the appeal are as
follows:
The appellant being a contractor was awarded a contract for
construction and maintenance of village roads. On finding certain
difficulties and delay in execution of the work, the Competent
Authority and the Chief Operating Officer, Karnataka Rural Road
Development Agency, Bengaluru passed an order on 27.12.2006.
The terms of the agreement dated 06.10.2004 between the parties
specifically refers to a scheme of dispute redressal under Clause
24 under the caption "Dispute Redressal System".
4. Clause 24 of the agreement is reproduced in the appeal
memo and the same reads thus:
WA No. 960 of 2022
"24. Dispute Redressal System
...
24.2 Either party will have the right of appeal against
the decision of the competent authority to the
standing empowered committee if the amount
appealed against exceeds rupees one lakh.
24.3 The composition of the empowered standing
committee will be
i. One official member, chairman of the Standing
empowered committee, not below the rank of
additional secretary to the State Government;
ii. One official member not below the rank of chief
engineer; and
iii. One non official member who will be ethnical
expert of chief engineer's level selected by
contractor from a panel of three persons given
to him by the employer.
24.4 The Contractor and the employer will be
entitled to present their case in writing duly
supported by documents. If so requested, the
standing empowered committee may allow one
opportunity to the contractor and the employer
for oral agreements for a specified period. The
empowered committee shall give decision
within a period of ninety days from the date of
appeal, failing which the contractor can
approach the appropriate court for resolution of
the dispute."
5. In view of this Scheme, the appellant approached the
Committee and the Committee, vide order dated 22.01.2011
upheld the order of the Competent Authority to take necessary
WA No. 960 of 2022
action to recover balance amount of Rs.17,49,130/- from the
appellant. The copy of the order of the Committee along with the
proceedings of the meeting of the Committee is placed on record at
Annexure-A.
6. On perusal of the order of the Committee, it is revealed that
the Committee made reference only to the contentions raised
before the Committee and the order of the Competent Authority.
Only on the basis of the Executive Engineer's denial, the
Committee arrived at the conclusion that there are no proper
reasons for delay in completing the work relating to the contract
namely PMGSV Phase 3 Package No.KN26-07 within the
stipulated time without proper reasons. At the cost of repetition, we
may state that the order fails to show independent reasons
assigned by the Committee and as such, it can safely be said that
the order of the Committee suffers from non-application of mind.
On this ground alone, the appeal is partly allowed. The matter is
remitted back to the Empowering Standing Committee for a
decision a fresh. The Empowering Standing Committee to decide
the appeal filed by the appellant a fresh as expeditiously as
possible and not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of a
WA No. 960 of 2022
copy of this order after providing equal opportunity of hearing to the
parties. Needless to state that the composition of the Committee
shall be as per Clause 24.3 of the agreement. It is expected that
the parties will extend full and proper co-operation to the
Committee for disposal of the appeal in the timeline fixed by this
Court.
Authenticated copy of the order be provided to the learned
counsel appearing for the parties.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
AHB
