JUDGMENT

Dated this the 14th day of February, 2022 The petitioner, a Company engaged in dredging and removal of the silt (de-silting) from water bodies, has approached this Court seeking to declare that Ext.P6 is not liable to be cancelled and to declare that the time stipulated in Ext.P1 is not liable to be reduced to 12 months from original 36 months and that respondents 2 to 4 are not authorised to do so after the bid is finalised.

2. The 2nd respondent-Kerala State Mineral Development Corporation Limited (KEMDEL) floated Ext.P1 NIT on 17.02.2021 for the work “Restoration of storage capacity of Walayar Dam Reservoir by removing silt and silt mixed with sand and clay by means of Pneumatic suction pumps and thereafter separating them individually into separate stacks in measurable form”. The petitioner submitted bid in response to Ext.P1. The respondents invited the petitioner for further negotiations. By Ext.P4 letter dated 26.07.2021, the petitioner agreed to do the work at a revised ₹

rate of 540/- Cubic Metre (GST to be paid extra).

3. The petitioner states that the respondents accepted the revised rate as is evidenced by Ext.P5. The petitioner was issued with Ext.P6 Selection Notice dated 24.09.2021 also. In Ext.P6, it was stated that the work should be completed in all respects within a specified time from the date of handing over of the site. The petitioner states that in Ext.P1, it was specifically stated that the period of completion of work is 36 months.

4. Thereafter, the respondents issued Ext.P7 draft agreement. Clause 6 of the draft agreement stated that the contractor is bound to complete the work within 12 months.

The said period of 12 months was a major departure from Ext.P1 NIT. The petitioner, thereupon, submitted Ext.P8 letter to the Managing Director, KEMDEL stating that 36 months is the time granted as per Ext.P1 and within the 12 months period as contained in Ext.P7 draft agreement, it will not be humanly possible to complete the de-siltation work of the Dam.

5. The 4th respondent, thereafter, invited the petitioner for a meeting. Ext.P10 minutes of the meeting held on 18.10.2021 would indicate that the respondent offered the petitioner to accept the 12 months period on condition that extension of period to complete the work can be considered depending upon the progress of the work.

6. The petitioner, thereafter, sent Ext.P11 letter to the Managing Director, KEMDEL pointing out that in the 12 months period, the petitioner will be able to show only 15- 20% progress and will be able to complete only procurement of equipments as well as mobilisation. Only about 6 to 7 months will be available for dredging and separation. It is not humanly possible to complete the work within that time. The respondents, however, issued Ext.P12 letter dated 28.10.2021 to the petitioner requiring the petitioner to execute the agreement on or before 10.11.2021.

7. The petitioner again sent Ext.P13 letter to the Chairman, KEMDEL pointing out that Clause 6 of the proposed agreement mentions that the department may consider an extension of time period but the extension is subject to fulfillment of various conditions and also subject to the approval of the Government of Kerala. The petitioner stated that such extensions, even if granted, may take a considerable amount of time, which will either stall the project till the extension arrives or the petitioner will be forced to continue without having a valid extension. This will be a risky proposition. In spite of the concerns raised by the petitioner, the KEMDEL issued Ext.P14 letter dated 26.11.2021, again requiring the petitioner to enter into agreement on or before 10.12.2021, failing which necessary action will be taken to cancel the selection notice.

8. The petitioner again requested the respondent as per Ext.P15 dated 02.01.2022 to grant the petitioner 36 months contract period so that the petitioner can proceed with further formalities of signing the agreement. To the surprise and