Contract revoked on the grounds that no work had been completed and there was no supervision: Patna High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.143121 Shri Brijesh Kumar a proprietorship Firm situated at Village Chauriya tola P.O. Dhumnagar P.S. Jagdishpur District West Champaran through its proprietor Brijesh Kumar male aged about 44 years S o Ramashray Prasad having same address ... Petitioner s The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Rural Works Department Govt. of Bihar Patna Principal Secretary Rural Works Department Govt. of Bihar Patna Executive Engineer Rural Works Department Works Div. Narkatiyaganj Engineer in Chief Rural Works Department Bihar Patna ... Respondent s The proceedings of the Court are being conducted by Hon’ble the Chief Justice Hon’ble Judges through Video Conferencing from their residential offices residences. Also the Advocates and the Staffs joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residences For the Petitioner s For the Respondent s CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR Mr.Baidya Nath Thakur Adv Mr.P.N. ShahiFor quashing the order dated 03.07.2021 passed by the Executive Engineer Rural Works Department Works Div. Narkatiyaganj West Champaran whereby the Agreement No. 13 2008 09 dated 10.12.2008 executed in favour of the petitioner for construction of road under the Prime Minister Rural Road Scheme from Baisakhwa to Sikta in the district of West Champaran bearing Package No. BR 37R 152 has been rescinded and recommendation sent to the Engineer in chief Bihar Patna for blacklisting the petitioner Patna High Court CWJC No.143121 dt.17 01 2022 proprietorship firm. Further a writ of Mandamus be issued: ii) For direction to the Executive Engineer Rural Works Department Works Division Narkatiyaganj West Champaran to make payment of approximately Rs 76 81 000 to the petitioner firm under the Agreement No 13 2008 09 dated 10.12.2008 towards renovation work of the fully constructed road which was severely damaged in the ravaing flood of 2010 iii) For direction to the Executive Engineer to pay the maintenance amount of approximately Rs. 24 85 364 for the financial years 2017 18 to 2020 21 under the Agreement No. 13 2008 09 dated 10.12.2008 iv) For direction to the Executive Engineer to pay approximately 50 lakhs to the petitioner towards permanent restoration cost for repairing works of the project road in 2020 21 as against the damage caused in the flood of 2017.” Petitioner in this writ application has assailed the order dated 03.07.2021 passed by the Executive Engineer Rural works Department Works Division Narkatiyaganj West Champaran by which the contract entered between the petitioner and Rural works Department has been rescinded on the ground that no work has been done as well as lack of supervision. Since the writ petition raises disputed question of fact same cannot be adjudicated by the High Court under its discretionary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Under the agreement entered between the petitioner and Rural Works Department Government of Bihar there is provision of adjudication of dispute between the parties Patna High Court CWJC No.143121 dt.17 01 2022 arising out of execution of work which bind both the parties In view of terms of the agreement the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum as agreed between the parties to resolve their dispute in terms of the agreement. Petitioner is at liberty to take other remedial measures as available to him under law for redressal of his grievance The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms Interlocutory Application(s) if any stands disposed of (S. Kumar J

Summary: There is a provision in the agreement between the petitioner and the Government of Bihar’s Rural Works Department for adjudication of disputes between the parties arising out of the execution of work that binds both parties where contract revoked on the grounds that no work had been completed and there was no supervision, the petitioner free to approach the appropriate forum as agreed between the parties to resolve their dispute in accordance with the agreement is upheld by the High Court of Patna through the learned bench led by HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR in the case of Shri Brijesh Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar (Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14317 of 2022) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has requested for the order of the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Div., Narkatiyaganj, West Champaran, dated 03.07.2021, rescinding the agreement dated 10.12.2008 executed in favour of the petitioner for the construction of a road under the Prime Minister Rural Road Scheme from Baisakhwa to Sikta in the district of West Champaran and sending a recommendation to the Engineer-in-chief, Bihar, Patna, for blacklisting proprietorship firm of the petitioner. Furthermore, a writ of mandamus be issued directing the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Narkatiyaganj, West Champaran, to make payment of approximately Rs. 76,81,000/- to the petitioner firm under Agreement dated 10.12.2008 towards renovation work of the fully constructed road that was severely damaged in the devastating flood of 2010. Additionally, a writ of Mandamus be issued, directing the Executive Engineer to pay the maintenance amount of approximately Rs. 24,85,364/- for the financial years 2017-18 to 2020-21 under the Agreement dated 10.12.2008, as well as directing the Executive Engineer to pay the petitioner approximately 50 lakhs towards permanent restoration costs for repairing works of the project road in 2020-21 as a result of the damage caused by the flood of 2017. In this writ application, the petitioner has challenged the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Narkatiyaganj, West Champaran’s order dated 03.07.2021, which revoked the contract between the petitioner and the Rural Works Department on the grounds that no work had been completed and there was no supervision. As the writ petition concerns a contested factual issue, the High Court cannot decide it using its discretionary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. There is a provision in the agreement between the petitioner and the Government of Bihar’s Rural Works Department for adjudication of disputes between the parties arising out of the execution of work that binds both parties. In light of the terms of the agreement, the writ petition is dismissed, with the petitioner free to approach the appropriate forum as agreed between the parties to resolve their dispute in accordance with the agreement, and the petitioner free to pursue other legal remedies for redress of his grievance. Click here to read the judgment Judgement reviewed by – Pooja Lakshmi