Decided on March 20,2018

Dr. Sanjay Kamle And Ors. Appellant
Housing And Environment Dept. And Ors. Respondents


- (1.) The grievances in the present public interest litigation was in respect of delay in completion of Railway over Bridge (ROB) between Kesarbagh Road to Annapurna Road, Scheme No.141 RE-1. This Court disposed of the writ petition on 02nd of March, 2017 directing the Commissioner, Indore Division to call a meeting of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Engineer of Indore Development Authority (for short 'IDA') as well as the contractor and to provide all proofs and designs for the left out work within one week and submit its report with an affidavit of Chief Executive Officer, IDA. The relevant direction reads as under: "14. Considering the aforesaid disappointing situations, without indulging in blame game or charges-counter charges, we direct the learned Commissioner to examine this matter by calling a meeting with the Chief Executive Officer IDA, Indore and the Contractor as well Chief Engineer of IDA and provide all the drawing and designs for the left out work within a period of one week from today and submit its report before this Court supported with the affidavit of Chief Executive Officer, IDA. We further direct that the Respondent No.3 shall complete the remaining work in respect of ROB in question within two month from the date of the meeting convened by the Commissioner, Indore on the basis of whatever drawings designs have been supplied to him. In case he thinks that no detail drawings designs have been provided to him in respect of any particular work, he shall complete the same strictly as per terms and conditions of the contract, of course, without compromising with the technical specifications, quality and esthetics of the work in totality."
(2.) Thereafter, the Commissioner, Indore Division has submitted a report dated 25/03/2017, with the following recommendations: " Having seen and observed the works done by the contractor and its affidavit submitted in Hon'ble High Court, I didn't see any justified reasons for noncompletion of works by the contractor. In the light of above I recommend the following for kind consideration of Hon'ble High Court: 1. Contractor should complete remaining work within 1 month based on the details given in contract and earlier information given by IDA from the day Hon'ble High Court decides and orders. 2. IDA and its engineer shall remain present on site to provide technical guidance (if any) to the contractor to finish the incomplete works of the bridge. 3. If contractor still fails to execute the work in time, IDA should be allowed to terminate contract and get the remaining (incomplete works) executed by any other agency at the risk and cost of present contractor. 4. This will have no adverse or favourable implication on either party fro their rival claims before arbitration or any court of law."
(3.) Thereafter, this Court passed an order on 01/05/2017 to list the case on 16/05/2017. On 16/05/2017, the Counsel appearing for IDA has submitted that except the work of laying drainage line over the railway track, all the works have been completed by the contractor. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3/contractor, pointed out that the payment has not been released by IDA, although the contractor has completed the work on 12th of May 2017, except the work of laying drainage line over the railway track. Thereafter, IDA was directed to approve the design and drawings submitted by the contractor and release the payment of the work executed by it. Learned counsel for the IDA has submitted that the payments have been made, whereas, the learned counsel for the contractor submits that the issue of measurement is still not finalised.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.