Kerala High Court
P.T.X.Sons Constructions vs The Project Engineer on 30 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 8TH SRAVANA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 15271 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
M/S.P.T.X.SONS CONSTRUCTIONS
AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PVT. LIMITED,
H.O. THALAYAZHAM, VI/152, THALAYAZHAM P.O.,
VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686607,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
P.T. XAVIER, AGED 52, S/O. THOMAS, PUTHENTHARA
HOUSE, THALAYAZHAM P.O., VAIKOM,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686607.
BY ADVS.
SHAJI THANKAPPAN
SUBIN K SUDHEER
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE PROJECT ENGINEER,
OFFICER OF THE PROJECT ENGINEER,
KEALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,
BUILDING NO.508, SAI DARSHAN,
CHIRAKADAVAM, KAYAMKULAM P.O.,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690572.
2 THE DEPUTY PROJECT ENGINEER,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY PROJECT ENGINEER,
KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,
VAIKOM, 32/A/8 MULLAPPARAMBIL BUILDING,
VAIKOM P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686641.
W.P.(C) No.15271 of 2021 2
3 THE KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, TC 11/570,
MUSEUM BAINS COMPOUND, KOWDIAR P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695003.
BY ADV.SMT.PRINCY XAVIER
BY SRI.G.BAIJU RAJ, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 30.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.15271 of 2021 3
W.P.(C) No.15271 of 2021
-----------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a contractor who was awarded a work
by the Kerala Land Development Corporation Limited (the
Corporation). The petitioner has stopped the execution of the
work before its completion. They have been consequently
issued Ext.P4 communication by the first respondent directing
to restore the work within seven days. Since the petitioner has
not complied with the direction in Ext.P4, Ext.P7 order has been
issued by the first respondent terminating the contract. Ext.P7
is under challenge in the writ petition.
2. The case made out by the petitioner in the writ
petition is that Ext.P4 has been issued directing them to
resume the work during the period during which there was
complete lock down in the State and therefore, termination of
the contract for non compliance of such a direction is illegal.
The petitioner challenges Ext.P7 order on that ground in the
writ petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as
also the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation.
4. The learned Standing Counsel for the
Corporation pointed out that the work referred to in the writ
petition is one allotted to the petitioner during 2019 and
despite lapse of substantial time, the petitioner could complete
only a minuscule portion of the work. It was also pointed out
by the Standing Counsel that the work was terminated as it
was convinced that the petitioner will not be able to complete
the work within a reasonable time.
5. It is seen that the main reason on which the
work was terminated is that the petitioner has not complied
with Ext.P4 direction. Ext.P4 direction is one issued on
08.06.2021. As per the said direction, the petitioner had to
resume the work within seven days. It is beyond dispute that
there was complete lock down in the State during the said
period. It is seen that on receipt of Ext.P4, the petitioner
submitted Ext.P5 representation seeking further time in the
matter. Ext.P7 order was issued without considering Ext.P5
representation.
In the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the view that
the writ petition can be disposed of directing the first
respondent to consider Ext.P5 representation within two weeks
from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.
Ordered accordingly. Needless to say that until the direction
aforesaid is complied with, further action pursuant to Ext.P7
shall not be taken.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE
rkj
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15271/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
05/03/2019 ISSUED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT
POINTING OUT THE ISSUES ON THE SITE BY
THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P2 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF LETTER DATED
15/05/2019 BEARING NO.
10/PE(KYLM)/RIDF-XX/2015-16 ISSUED BY
THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
22/06/2019 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO
THE 1ST RESPONDENT REQUESTING THEM TO
MAKE ARRANGEMENTS IN THE WORK SITE
BEFORE THE COMMENCEMENT OF FARMING
PERIOD.
Exhibit P4 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEARING
NO.10/PE(KYLM)/RIDF-XX-2015-2016 DATED
08/06/2021 DIRECTING THE PETITIONER TO
START THE WORK.
Exhibit P5 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF REPRESENTATION
DATED 23/06/2021 GIVEN BY THE
PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD SIGNED FROM THE
OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH
RESPECT TO EXT.P5.
Exhibit P7 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE ORDER AS PER
ITS PROCEEDINGS NO.10/PE(KYLM)/RIDF-XX-
2015-2016 DATED 26/06/2021.
