Writ jurisdiction can address arbitrary state actions in contractual disputes, emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness and adherence to contractual terms, especially regarding extensions and terminations.

JUDGMENT :

T.R. Ravi, J.

The petitioner in both these writ petitions is a partnership firm engaged in road construction. The firm undertakes projects for the Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB), the National Highway Authority, and the Public Works Department. The Petitioner has satisfactorily completed several work contracts, including the Kuttipuram-Puthuponnani National Highway and National Highway 15/000 to 57/000 in Wayanad. The prayers in these writ petitions are intrinsically connected, and the writ petitions are being heard and disposed of together. The references to the exhibits and the status of the parties are -6- as per W.P.(C)No.11720 of 2023, which is treated as the main case.

2. The 5^th respondent, who had been entrusted with the development, maintenance, and management of National Highway 766 including the section from km 25/1000 to km 45/1000, by the 1^st respondent, invited proposals from eligible bidders for "strengthening and geometric improvements from km 25/1000 to km 45/1000 of NH 766 (old NH 212) in Kozhikode District in the State of Kerala on Engineering, Procurement, Construction ("EPC") mode." The petitioner was the successful bidder. An Engineering, Procurement, and Construction Agreement was executed on 07.08.2020. The site was handed over on 18.09.2020, on which day the work was to commence. The time for completion of the work was twelve months from the date of commencing the work and was to end on 17.9.2021. The petitioner had also executed a Bank guarantee as per the terms of the contract.

3. According to the petitioner, at the time of handing over the site, there were thirty trees, eighty electric posts, ten telephone poles, and one bus shelter at the site. The heavy rains during the years 2020 and 2021, and the statewide lockdown from 08.05.2021 to 30.06.2021 due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, affected the procurement of materials and skilled labourers. The site was also earmarked as a Containment Zone on various occasions, and several labourers had also tested positive for the COVID-19 virus during that period. Even after the lockdown period, the work was carried out strictly adhering to the COVID-19 protocols, and all the above factors, according to the petitioner, resulted in slow progress of the project. The petitioner also submits that the structural works in different stretches were delayed due to the non-shifting of utilities and the failure to remove trees from the site. On 24.08.2021, the petitioner applied for an extension of time to complete the work. The request was forwarded by the 5^th respondent to the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways (MoRTH), recommending the grant of time extension, by imposing a penalty on the petitioner. On 25.10.2021, the Executive Engineer wrote to the petitioner, directing them to submit a proposal for extension of time. This was followed by a letter from the Superintending Engineer asking them to submit a proposal for extension of time, without delay. The petitioner applied on 24.12.2021, seeking extension of time till 30.06.2022. On 4.2.2022, the Executive Engineer wrote to the Superintending Engineer, requesting that the time for completion of the work by the petitioner be extended up to 30.6.2022.

4. The Ministry of Road Transport & Highways (MoRTH) issued a Circular dated 11.04.2022, considering the COVID-19 pandemic, extending relief to contractors/developers of the road sector, for the period from 03.06.2022 to 31.10.2022. Taking note of the above circular, the 2^nd respondent returned the proposal for extension of time to the 5^th respondent, directing him to