Back
2025 Supreme(Gau) 2171
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
NELSON SAILO, J.
M/s Bhimji Velji Sorathia Construction Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Vs.
The State of Arunachal Pradesh - Respondent
WP(C) No. 219(AP) of 2025, WP(C) No. 346(AP) of 2025
Decided On : 18-12-2025
For the Appellant :Mr. S. Dutta, Sr. Adv. Mr. T. T. Tara, Adv. Advocates
For the Respondent: Mr. N. Ratan, Addl. A.G., AP
Authority decisions must adhere to procedural requirements, and prior approvals issued constitute binding obligations on the State, protecting the rights of engaged contractors.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Law - Authority of the State - Arunachal Pradesh Rules of Executive Business, 1987 - The petitioner challenged communications restricting work on additional bridges despite prior approvals for their construction; the court found no irregularities in the process leading to the approval. (Paras 29-26)
(B) Contract Law - Extension of Agreement - The court held that the work undertaken was supplementary to the original contract, which was supported by prior approvals from competent authorities, emphasizing the need for following statutory procedures. (Paras 20-26)
(C) Estoppel - The principle of promissory estoppel was applied in the context of the petitioner justifiably relying on prior approvals to commence work. (Para 14)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner firm was awarded a contract for road widening and strengthening but encountered issues when the government limited the works to only two bridges due to procedural concerns regarding tendering.
Findings of Court:
The communications restricting works were found unsustainable; the court upheld the validity of the approvals and the entitlement of the petitioner to continue the works as agreed.
Issues: Main questions included the validity of the communications restricting the construction of additional work and the authority of the State to alter contract terms unilaterally.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the prior approvals granted constituted a binding obligation on the State, which could not alter the terms without proper procedure.
Result: The impugned communications were set aside, allowing the petitioner to continue work.
JUDGMENT AND ORDER :
NELSON SAILO, J.
This order will dispose of both the writ petitions.
[2.] Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. T. T. Tara, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. N. Ratan, learned Additional Advocate General, Arunachal Pradesh, for all the respondents.
[3.] In WP(C) No. 219 of 2025, the petitioner has challenged the Communication dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure-13 Series), more particularly, Sub- clause (b) of Clause-3 of the said Letter and also the Communication dated 24.04.2025 (Annexure-13 Series).
[4.] In WP(C) No. 346 of 2025, the petitioner has challenged the Communication dated 21.01.2025 (Annexure – 2) and Communication dated 21.02.2025 (Annexure – 3).
[5.] Brief facts of the case is that the petitioner’s firm on 10.11.2021 entered into an agreement with the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Doimukh Division, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, for execution of work known as “Widening and Strengthening of Itanagar – Jote Road – 20 KM” at the cost of Rs.69,55,30,570.69/- (Rupees Sixty-Nine Crore Fifty-Five Lakh Thirty Thousand Five Hundred Seventy and Sixty-Nine Paise) only. During the execution of the said project, it was observed that six (6) existing steel bridges along the road were in bad condition and required urgent re-construction. The local MLA, therefore, vide his Letter dated 24.07.2024, requested the Advisor, PWD (WZ), to explore the feasibility of engaging the petitioner to undertake the bridge construction as an additional work.
[6.] Pursuant to the aforesaid request, the Superintending Engineer, PWD, Capital Circle vide Letter dated 31.07.2024 directed the Executive Engineer, PWD, Doimukh Division to explore the feasibility of engaging the petitioner firm for undertaking construction of bridges under the “Widening and Strengthening of Itanagar – Jote Road 20 KM” was being carried out. The Executive Engineer, in compliance with the directions of Superintending Engineer recommended assigning of the construction of all six (6) bridges to the petitioner under the existing contract as per Clause – 12 of the agreement subject to technical sanction and approval of the BOQ. The recommendation was noted and processed by the Chief Engineer (WZ) without contest as per the file noting. Subsequently, approval of the Competent Authority was obtained vide UO No. 530 dated 17.09.2024 and the Superintending Surveyor of Works for the Chief Engineer (WZ) issued a Letter dated 19.09.2024 to the Superintending Engineer, Capital Circle directing necessary steps to be carried out for construction of the project of permanent bridges (six in numbers) within the “Widening and Strengthening of Itanagar – Jote Road” at the earliest possible time. The Superintending Engineer, in turn, directed the Executive Engineer, Doimukh Division to take further necessary action. In furtherance of the said approvals and directions, the Executive Engineer, Doimukh Division issued Letter dated 23.09.2024 to the petitioner firm requesting immediate subsoil investigation of all the six (6) bridges, clearly specifying the terms of procurement as an additional item under the existing agreement subject to approval of BOQ and technical sanction.
[7.] Accordingly, the petitioner firm commenced the work on all the six (6) bridges except the “Bhath Nallah” bridge initially, which was later started after land compensation was paid. According to the petitioner, significant resources including manpower and machinery have been mobilized on all the six (6) bridges. The Chief Engineer (WZ) vide Letter dated 20.12.2024 asked for the status report from the Executive Engineer, Doimukh Division and in response the Executive Engineer submitted the status report vide his Letter dated 30.12.2024.
[8.] Thereafter, the Executive Engineer, Doimukh Division vide Letter dated 23.02.2025 wrote to the Assistant Engineer, Balijan Sub-Division to stop the unauthorized works of five (5) number of bridges on Itanagar – Jote Road, except f
