BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
L. VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
MJD Construction and Engineering Contractors (P) Limited - Appellant
Versus
Chief Engineer, National Highways, Chennai - Respondent
W.P. (MD) No. 30300 of 2023, W.M.P. (MD) No. 26105 of 2023
Decided On : 09-01-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition filed to quash completion certificate (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner’s entitlement to maintain road (Para 3) |
| 3. defense about completion of work (Para 4) |
| 4. examination of contractual obligations and delay attributions. (Para 5) |
| 5. impact of respondent's actions on work completion (Para 6) |
| 6. court quashes impugned certificate (Para 7) |
| 7. writ petition partly allowed (Para 8) |
ORDER :
1. This writ petition has been filed to quash the consolidated completion certificate dated 14.07.2022 issued by the third respondent and consequently directing the third respondent to issue work completion certificate with respective work completed dated i.e., 09.11.2020 and 27.02.2022.
2. The claim of the petitioner is that under the Annual Plan 2018-19, the work of strengthening in Km 599/0-633/0 in selected stretches of NH-47 including the widening of existing two lane at Km 625/0 - 626/2 into double Lane with paved shoulders of NH47 in the State of Tamil Nadu on Engineering, Procurement & Construction on EPC mode was awarded to the petitioner as per agreement dated 11.11.2019 and the appointment date was fixed on 20.11.2019. As per the agreement between the petitioner as well as the third respondent, the petitioner company commenced work and Bituminous Concrete (Wearing coat) work were completed for the reaches Km 607/0 – 610/100, Km 623/0 – 626/187, Km 630/0 – 630/546 and Km 631/660 – 632/520 of HN4 on 29.10.2020. The work of balance stretches from Km 610/100 – 620/0 and Km 631/0 – 639/0 of NH47 was stopped as per the Letter No.AP 883 / 20-18-2019 / A1 / dated 10.08.2020 due to laying of pipeline work by Divisional Engineer, National Highways, Nagercoil. After completion of the TWAD Board works, the petitioner resumed the road work on 16.09.2021 and completed the balance works in all respects on 03.03.2022 and a consolidated completion certificate was issued on 14.07.2022. Challenging the same, this writ petition is filed.
3. The plight of the petitioner as submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the entire work was done in two phases and that the first phase of work was over on 20.09.2020. The petitioner company is bound to maintain the road for a period of five years from the date of completion in terms of agreement entered into between the petitioner company and the third respondent. The second phase of work was completed on 03.03.2022 and in terms of the said agreement, the petitioner is entitled to maintain both the stretch of roads in the first phase of work for a period of five years from 30.10.2020 and the second phase of work commencing from 04.03.2022. Since the consolidated completion certificate was issued only on 14.07.2022, the petitioner is in compulsion to maintain the entire stretch till 2027 which would be at his disadvantage causing him heavy loss. As per EPC mode, the maintenance period is only 5 years. The petitioner completed the first phase of work as early as on 29.10.2020 and the delay in completing the second phase of work could be attributed only to the third respondent. Only on the direction by Letter No.AP 883/2018-19/Al, dated 10.08.2020, the petitioner was in a compulsion to stall the work of the first phase and wait till the TWAD board work was completed, as directed by the third respondent. For clarity, the same is extracted as follows:
Since the petitioner was not able to complete the second phase that is, the entire work in a single strength, the reason which is attributed only to the third respondent, the petitioner cannot be compelled to maintain the entire stretch till 2027 and hence, the petitioner is before me.
4. Mr.S.Kameswaran, learned Government Advocate based on his counter affidavit submitted that, as per the agreement entered into between the petitioner as well as the third respondent, the entire work was completed only on 27.02.2022. The work was completed physically only on 03.03.2022 but the same would be considered to be completed only after get
AI
A contractor's maintenance obligations should correspond with completion dates of respective project phases, penalizing the contractor for delays caused by the client is unwarranted.
Contract law requires that any claimed losses be substantiated with proof and processed according to natural justice.
A notice demanding completion of contractual work must consider prior recommendations, and failure to do so warrants judicial intervention and an opportunity for the contractor to be heard.
The court emphasized the necessity for proper consideration of completed public contract work while not adjudicating claims or rights at this stage.
The competent authority's certification should adhere to the requirements of the contract clause, and additional information in a certificate should be considered superfluous. Observations in a perfo....
The court emphasizes the duty of governmental bodies to ensure timely completion of public works as stipulated in contracts, reinforcing the right to enforce performance through writs of mandamus.
Contract and Specific Relief – Jurisdiction - There is no cause of action and matter may be appropriately referred to appropriate forum as there is arbitral agreement between parties to address all i....
Contractors must fulfill obligations under signed agreements regardless of subsequent site conditions unless formal amendments are made to the contract.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.