Muhammed Noufal C vs The Chief Manager
2022 Latest Caselaw 719 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
     MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 27TH POUSHA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 21159 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          MUHAMMED NOUFAL C,
          AGED 29 YEARS,
          S/O ABOO, CHOLAMUGATH HOUSE,
          VALAMKULAM P.O., PERINTHALMANNA,
          MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 357.

          BY ADV BIJU ABRAHAM


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE CHIEF MANAGER,
          KERALA INSTITUTE OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION,
          PROJECT MANAGEMENT UNIT-KILA-KIIFB,
          KLLA REGIONAL CENTRE, KUMARAPURAM P.O.,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 011.

    2     EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
          OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
          LSG DIVISION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 721.

    3     ASSISTANT ENGINEER,
          MANNARKKAD MUNICIPALITY, MANNARKKAD-678 582.

    4     ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
          LSGD SUB DIVISION,
          MANNARKKAD BLOCK PANCHAYATH,
          MANNARKKAD-678 582.

          R1 BY ADV SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED, SC, KILA
          R3 BY ADV.SRI.P.R.VENKATESH, SC
          SRI.APPU P.S., GOVERNMENT PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.21159/2021

                                      2




                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 17th day of January, 2022

The petitioner, aggrieved by the improper and illegal

steps taken by the respondents in connection with the tender

for construction of School building in Mannarkkad, has filed

this writ petition seeking to direct the respondents to

refund/pay to the petitioner the deposit and expenses met by

him in connection with the agreement No.92/CL-

23/CMPMU/KILA-KIIFB/2020-21 dated 26.02.2021 with

interest to the petitioner, within a time limit fixed by this Court.

2. The petitioner states that he entered into an

agreement with the respondents for construction of the School

building of GUPS, Mannarkkad in Mannarkkad Municipality in

Palakkad District. The agreement was executed on WP(C).No.21159/2021

26.02.2021. As per the agreement, the work had to be

completed within six months from the date of handing over the

site to the petitioner. The petitioner submits that the work site

was not handed over to the petitioner. After about two months

of execution of the agreement, the petitioner sent a notice

dated 19.04.2021, requiring to handover the site. The request

was not positively responded to. The petitioner again

submitted another representation on 05.07.2021. The

representation dated 05.07.2021 also did not yield any result.

3. The petitioner submits that thereafter on

04.08.2021, the petitioner submitted Ext.P7 representation

requiring the respondents to relieve him from the contractual

liability and to repay the amount deposited by the petitioner in

connection with the contract. The respondents thereafter

issued a letter to the petitioner to carry out the work. The

learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the period

of contract, the petitioner cannot be forced to complete the

work. The respondents did not handover the site to the WP(C).No.21159/2021

petitioner for completion of the work. In the circumstances, the

respondents are compellable to relieve the petitioner from the

contractual obligations and also to refund the amount

deposited by the petitioner.

4. The 1st respondent contested the writ petition filing a

Statement. The 1st respondent stated that he addressed the

Director of KILA on 28.10.2021 stating the lapses on the part

of the petitioner in carrying out the works he undertook. The

petitioner did not respond to the notice dated 08.09.2021 to

handover the work site. The petitioner failed to commence the

work which was undertaken by him. Therefore, the petitioner

is not entitled to any relief. The respondents further submitted

that the reliefs sought for by the petitioner are not liable to be

granted in exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction of this

Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The

remedy available to the petitioner is to approach the Civil

Court.

WP(C).No.21159/2021

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Standing Counsel representing the 1st respondent.

6. It is not disputed that the petitioner had entered into

an agreement with the 1st respondent on 26.02.2021. The

period allocated for completion of the work was six months

from the date of handing over of the site. It is further not

disputed that the work site was not handed over to the

petitioner within the period of six months.

7. The petitioner has submitted notices to the

respondents seeking handing over of the site in the month of

April and July, 2021. The site was not handed over.

Subsequently, after expiry of about six months, the petitioner

sent Ext.P7 representation requiring to relieve him from the

contractual liabilities. It is at this stage that the 1 st respondent

and its officers required the petitioner to resume the work.

This Court finds that the respondents handed over the work

site for carrying out the work, after the period stipulated for

completion of work under the contract. The respondents WP(C).No.21159/2021

cannot compel the petitioner to start and complete the work so

belatedly. The action of the respondents in requiring the

petitioner to start the work after about seven months of

execution of the agreement when the stipulated period for

completion of work is six months, is therefore unjustified.

Consequently, it is declared that the petitioner is entitled to get

relieved from the contractual obligations.

The writ petition is disposed of declaring that the

petitioner should be relieved from the contractual obligations in

respect of the work in question. The respondents are directed

to refund the amount deposited by the petitioner with the

respondents in connection with the agreement, within a period

of two months. The question of payment of interest and

compensation is left open.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE SR WP(C).No.21159/2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21159/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

   Exhibit P1         A TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER ACCEPTANCE
                      NOTICE DATED 20.02.2021 ISSUED BY THE
                      1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
   Exhibit P2         A TRUE COPY OF THE FORMAT OF CONTRACT
                      AGREEMENT    COMMUNICATED     TO    THE

PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH A LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE NOTICE Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 5.4.2021 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 19.4.2021 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 5.7.2021 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.7.2021 Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE SEND BY THE PETITIONER THROUGH HIS LAWYER DATED 4.8.2021 Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 24.8.2021 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SEND BY THE PETITIONER THROUGH HIS LAWYER HATED 27.8.2021 TO THE RESPONDENTS Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE WITH APPENDIX ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 13.9.2021

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER No.CM/KILA-

KIIFB-PMU/CL-23/87/2020 DATED 28.10.2021 OF THE CHIEF MANAGER, KILA.