M/S. Anand Consultants vs The State Of Bihar
2023 Latest Caselaw 2062 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3895 of 2023
     ======================================================

M/s. Anand Consultants through its Proprietor, Rupesh Kumar Srivastava (male) aged about 52 years, Son of Late Anand Bihari Srivastava, 157C (near Tennis Court), Patliputra Colony, Patna- 800013.

... ... Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Chief Engineer-02, Rural Works Division, Bihar, Patna.

4. The Superintending Engineer-cum-Nodal Officer, PMGSY, Bihar Rural Road Development Authority, Patna.

5. The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Gogri.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Shivendra Kishore, Sr. Advocate Mr. Priyank Deepak, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, GA-2 Mr. Vijay Kumar Verma, AC to GA-2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 02-05-2023

Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner assisted by

Mr. Priyank Deepak, learned Advocate and Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh,

learned GA-2 for the State assisted by Mr. Vijay Kumar Verma, learned

AC to GA-2.

2. The petitioner in the present case is seeking the following

reliefs:-

"i. For a direction on the respondents to take decision on the representation of the petitioner dated 15.06.2022 and reminder dated 18.10.2022 in regard to forced closure of construction of road under NH-31 to PAURA package No. BR-17R-062 and to settle the account of the petitioner by making payment of remaining Patna High Court CWJC No.3895 of 2023 dt.02-05-2023

admitted amount towards execution of construction of road under the aforesaid agreement.

ii. For a direction on the respondents to refund a sum of Rs.44 lacs approx. deducted on account of time extension from the petitioner.

iii. For a direction on the respondents to refund the Security deposit amount of the petitioner alongwith statutory and delayed interest.

iv. For any other relief/reliefs to which petitioner is found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case."

Brief Facts of the Case

3. The petitioner is a proprietorship firm engaged in

construction of road, building etc. The Bihar Rural Road Development

Authority (in short 'BRRADA') invited a tender for construction of

road from ND-31-PAURA under Package no. BR-17R/62 where length

of road to be constructed was 11.61 kilometers at the construction cost

of Rs.512.95 lakhs, construction cost of CD work was 150.44 lakhs and

the maintenance cost for 5 years was Rs.48.62 lakhs.

Submission of the Petitioner

4. It is the case of the petitioner that a S.B.D. Agreement No.

10/SBD of 2012-13 was executed on 14.02.2013 between Rural Works

Department, Government of Bihar Works Division, Gogri and the

petitioner. The petitioner claims that the work of construction of road

was duly started in terms of the agreement but the construction faced

several obstructions from the private land owners in between Chain

5768m to Chain 7766 and Chain 2400m to Chain 3460. Under the

circumstances, it could not become possible to construct the road on the

said chain. It appears on perusal of the writ application that for various Patna High Court CWJC No.3895 of 2023 dt.02-05-2023

reasons, the petitioner claims that the work in question could not be

completed, he, however, kept on representing to the Department

informing them about the obstructions which were being raised by the

private land owners.

5. Be that as it may, it appears that the agreement of the

petitioner was rescinded vide Annexure '7' issued under signature of the

Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department Works Division, Gogri.

Against the rescindment order, the petitioner made representation and

he was heard by the Empowered Standing Committee. The Committee

decided to grant one opportunity to the petitioner for completing the

work by setting aside the order of rescindment. It is the case of the

petitioner that thereafter the petitioner sincerely tried to complete the

construction work but it could not be completed because of the

obstructions caused by the owners of the private land.

Submission of the State

6. Learned counsel for the State submits that the dispute

between the petitioner and the Department is in the matter of a works

contract, therefore, this application is not fit to be entertained. It is

further pointed out that the State of Bihar has enacted Bihar Public

Works Contract Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008 (hereinafter

referred to as the 'Act of 2008') whereunder Section '9' specifically

provides that where any dispute arises between the parties to the

contract, either party shall, irrespective of whether such contract

contains an arbitration clause or not, refer, within one year from the date Patna High Court CWJC No.3895 of 2023 dt.02-05-2023

on which the dispute has arisen, such dispute in writing to the Tribunal

for arbitration in such form and accompanied by such documents or

other evidence and by such fees, as may be prescribed. The Practice and

procedures to be followed in such cases are also incorporated in the Act

of 2008.

Consideration

7. Having heard learned senior counsel and learned counsel

for the State, this Court is of the considered opinion that the kind of

issues raised in the writ application cannot be adjudicated by this Court

sitting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. These are disputed

question of facts and this Court would not make any endeavour to go

into the same. The petitioner, if so advised, may seek his remedy in

accordance with law.

8. This application is dismissed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/-

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date            03.05.2023
Transmission Date