Kerala High Court
Abg Engineering India Pvt. ... vs State Of Kerala on 26 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1943
WP(C).No.7956 OF 2021(T)
PETITIONER:
ABG ENGINEERING INDIA PVT. LIMITED,
CORPORATE TOWERS, ST.MARYS GROUP, MUTHOOR,
THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689 107,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR.T.O.ALEYAS.
BY ADVS.
SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM)
SRI.PRASANTH M.P
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, WATER
RESOURCE DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
2 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KERALA WATER AUTHORITY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
3 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
P.H.CIRCLE, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688 001.
4 THE PROJECT MANAGER,
UIDSSMT, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688 001.
BY ADVS. SMT.VINITHA.B, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KWA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.7956 of 2021(T)
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner claims that the work
of 'Replacing the old/damaged pipe line-JICA
Assisted water supply project to Cherthala
Municipality and adjoining villages-
Replacing existing GRP Raw Water
Transmission line with MS pipe at
Maravanthuruthu Panchayath and allied works
in time bound manner', was awarded to it
based on which Ext.P3 agreement was executed
on 07.02.2017.
2. It is stated that even though
petitioner started all the preliminary works
including collection of MS pipes, the
respondents were unable to get road cutting
permission and there had been heavy public
protest. Because of all these, petitioner
could not commence the work in November,
WP(C).No.7956 of 2021(T)
2017, and complete the work in time.
3. It is stated that in view of the
delay, petitioner requested for hike in the
rates and as there was no fruitful results,
petitioner decided to give up the work and
submitted Ext.P10 representation for
foreclosure on 18.11.2020. It is stated that
Ext.P10 was followed by Ext.P11
representation. According to the petitioner,
it will not be possible for him to complete
the work at the same rates.
As the learned counsel for the
petitioner submitted that petitioner would
be satisfied with a direction to the 3 rd
respondent to consider Ext.P10
representation, the writ petition is
disposed of with a direction to the 3rd
respondent to consider and pass orders on
Ext.P10 representation, after affording an
WP(C).No.7956 of 2021(T)
opportunity of hearing to petitioner, within
a period of two months from the date of
receipt of a copy of the judgment.
Sd/-
P.V.ASHA
JUDGE
ww
WP(C).No.7956 of 2021(T)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ARTICLES AND MEMORANDUM OF
ASSOCIATION DATED 28/05/2003.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER SANCTION ORDER
DATED 30/01/2017.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT AGREEMENT DATED
07/02/2017.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER DATED 31/05/2018.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 26/05/2017 ALONG
WITH THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DATED
06/04/2017.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT DATED 17/01/2019.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 22/01/2019 OF
THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 09/05/2019
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12/02/2020
ADDRESSED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE FORECLOSURE APPLICATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED
18/11/2020.
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
11/02/2021.
