SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Chh) 220

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY, J.
M/s BSBK Private Limited - Petitioner
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Development & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) Nos. 3339, 3807, 5057 of 2023
Decided On : 29-04-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Satish Agrawal with Mr. Shalvik Tiwari.
For the Respondents:Mr. Praveen Das & Mr. Shashank Thakur, Deputy Advocate General, Mr. Ashutosh Trivedi, Mr. Kishore Bhaduri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pankaj Singh and Mr. Harsh Dave.

The court affirmed contractors' rights to price escalation due to delays in site handover by the Municipal Corporation, emphasizing non-compliance with contract terms and fair hearing principles in administrative decisions.

Headnote:(A) Contract Law - Agreement dated 07.03.2019 - Price escalation claims - The Municipal Corporation failed to provide timely work sites, affecting the completion of construction projects under the PMAY Scheme; petitioner entitled to price adjustments due to delays attributable to the Corporation as per Clause 3.26; failure to afford fair hearing in the rejection of claims and a lack of adequate reasoning in State's decision-making process. (Paras 2, 21, 27)

(B) Jurisdiction - Writ jurisdiction - Courts retain authority to intervene in instances of failures to adhere to principles of natural justice, particularly in contractual matters, where arbitrary actions by state authorities violate fundamental rights. (Paras 24, 26)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought reliefs including price escalation for construction of housing under the PMAY after delays caused by non-availability of work sites. The petitioner argued that the time extended for project completion was due to Municipal Corporation's failures.

Findings of Court:
The Court quashed the State's order dated 08.09.2023, directing assessment of claims for price escalation and GST refunds.

Issues: The petition raised questions of timely site availability and refusal of price escalation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that delays caused by the Corporation justified claims for price adjustments and highlighted failure in procedural fairness in resolving such claims.

Result: Petitioner entitled to price escalation and GST refund.

Table of Content
1. summary of contract execution and petitioner's claims. (Para 3 , 4)
2. arguments regarding delays and price escalation. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. court's view on natural justice and administrative actions. (Para 8 , 10 , 20)
4. entitlement to price escalation despite contract terms. (Para 22 , 24)
5. final order regarding claims and timelines for review. (Para 27 , 28)

ORDER :

1. Since the issue raised in the above captioned Writ Petitions filed by the petitioner bearing W.P.(C) No. 3339/2023; W.P.(C) No. 3807 of 2023 and W.P.(C) No. 5057 of 2023 are common, they are being disposed of by this Common Order.

2. The relief(s) sought in the above-stated petitions are stated herein below:-

    W.P.(C) No. 3339 of 2023:-

    “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records in respect of the grievance of the Petitioner kept in the possession of the Respondents, for its kind perusal;

    10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to adjudicate and declare that in the facts and circumstances of the case the petitioner is entitled to price escalation from the respondents;

    10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to immediately make payment of the price escalation to the petitioner for the work executed beyond the original contract period of 36 months along with its respective Running Account Bills;

    10.4 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief which the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case;

    10.5 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant cost of the petition to the Petitioner.”

    W.P.(C) No. 3807 of 2023:-

    “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records in respect of the grievance of the Petitioner kept in the possession of the Respondents, for its kind perusal;

    10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned letters dated 26.07.2023 (ANNEXURE – P/8) 27.07.2023 (ANNEXURE – P/10) and 03.08.2023 (ANNEXURE P-12), invoking the Advance Bank Guarantee No. 0853619BG0000058, 0853619BG0000041 and declare the same to be illegal;

    10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondents to recover Mobilization Advance from the Petitioner on pro-rata basis from the Running Account Bills of the Petitioner till the 100% value of work so that it stands fully recovered on completion of work;

    10.4 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief which the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case;

    10.5 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant cost of the petition to the Petitioner.”

    W.P.(C) No. 5057 of 2023:-

    “10.1 Call for the entire records in the possession of the Respondents in respect of the grievances of the Petitioner, for its kind perusal;

    10.2 Quash and set aside the impugned order dated 08.09.2023 (ANNEXURE – P/40) passed by the State Government;

    10.3 Adjudicate and declare that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Petitioner is entitled to price escalation from the Respondents for all works executed beyond the original contractual period of 36 months, in line with proposals submitted in the joint representations dated 24.01.2023, 22.02.2023 and 16.03.2023 addressed by the PMAY-HFA contractors (including the Petitioner) to the State Government;

    10.4 Adjudicate and declare that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Petitioner is entitled to payment of GST at enhanced rate of 18% with effect from 18.07.2022, as prescribed vide Notification No. 3/22 dated 13.07.2022;

    10.5 Grant costs of the Petition in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondents; &

    10.6 Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may consider necessary in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

3. The facts in a nutshell are that the Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur invited bids on 24.12.2018 for the construction o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top