Unilateral modifications to contractual agreements without mutual consent are arbitrary and violate contractual obligations and constitutional rights.

JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.

1. Present writ application has been filed by the Petitioner praying therein for following reliefs:-

(a) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, for quashing/setting aside the Letter No.693 dated 14.06.2024 (Annexure-17) issued by Executive Engineer, Road Division, Saraikela (Respondent No.5) wherein for the period 11.03.2022 to 03.10.2023 an alleged shortage of remittance of toll has been determined by Respondent No.5 in respect of Kandra Junction Toll Plaza, (Adityapur-Kandra Section) on the enhanced rate of toll, despite the fact that contract period has already expired on 11^th September, 2021 (at 8.00 Hrs.);

(b) For issuance of further appropriate writ, order or direction, including writ of declaration, declaring the action of respondent-State of Jharkhand of unilateral enhancement of the amount of contract value being the total instalment amount, is wholly illegal and arbitrary, as said unilateral enhancement was undertaken by Respondent-authority completely contrary to the terms and conditions of the contract agreement vide Agreement No. 01/RFP/2019-20 (Annexure-2) pertaining to Kandra Junction Toll Plaza (Adityapur-Kandra Section);

(c) For issuance of further appropriate writ, order or direction including writ of declaration, declaring that after expiry of period of contract pursuant to Agreement No.01/RFP/2019.20 which was finally expired on 11.03.2022, the status of the petitioner qua the toll collection a Kandra Junction Toll Plaza (Adityapur-Kandra Section) is that of an agent of respondent-State of Jharkhand for deploying specified category of personnel and supervising them for collection of user fee;

(d) For issuance of further appropriate writ, order or direction including writ of declaration, declaring that respondent-State of Jharkhand, post expiry of the period of contract entered by it with Petitioner vide Agreement No. 01/RFP/2019-20 i.e.11^th March, 2022 (at 8.00 Hrs.) till 3^rd October, 2023 being the date of relieving of the petitioner from Toll Plaza pertaining to Kandra Junction Toll Plaza (Adityapur-Kandra Section), is only entitled to receive payment of actual collection of toll from the Petitioner less toll, administrative and operational expenses plus supervision and service charges incurred by petitioner for collection of toll, especially because respondents, contrary to the terms of agreement, have unilaterallyextended the period of the contract for toll collection despite protest being made by Petitioner.

(e) For issuance of any other appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/ direction(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Brief facts of the case, as evident from the records, is that Road Construction Department, being an Executing Authority under Rule 2(f) of Jharkhand Highways Fees (Determination of Rate and Collection), Rules, 2011 published Notice Inviting Tender(NIT) dated 10.06.2019 primarily for appointment of User Fee Collection Agency for Kandra Junction Toll Plaza, Adityapur-Kandra Section.

3. Petitioner participated in aforesaid tender process and, having been declared as the Highest Bidder, was awarded work in questionand an agreement videAgreement No.01/RFP/2019-20 was executed between Petitioner and Executing Authority (Road Construction Department) which was valid for a period of two years having date of commencement from 11.09.2019 to 11.09.2021. Under the agreement, provision for extension of contract for a period of six months was provided on mutual consent between the parties, but Executing Authority (Road Construction Department) unilaterally extended the contract of the Petitioner. The extended period of six months expired on 11^th March, 2022, but even thereafter, vide letter no. 519 dated 22.03.2022, the contract was further extended till finalization of new contractor or for a period of three months, whichever is earlier. After issuance of aforesaid letter dated 22.03.2022, even no extension order