Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1572 (JHR)

Rajendra Prasad Singh v. State of Jharkhand

2017-08-31

APARESH KUMAR SINGH, B.B.MANGALMURTI

body2017
ORDER : Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. This Public Interest Litigation has been preferred by the petitioner, claiming himself to be the senior citizen and local resident of village Kadal Kurmi with a complain that construction of Mohammadganj-Japla-Dangwar Road, is not being executed by the contractor (Respondent No. 12) in a proper manner; no quality materials are being used and public money sanctioned for the construction work is being misappropriated. He prayed for a direction upon the Respondent Public Works Department to reconstruct the road using high quality and long lasting materials. He also prayed for cancellation of the Agreement executed with the Respondent No. 12 and to allot the work to other competent contractor. 3. As per the averments in the writ petition, the stretch of road measuring 35.76 kms (approximately) is to be constructed at an estimated cost of Rs. 128.71 crores. The road on being constructed will connect the villages with several important cities in the other State as well. The agency has been using dead stones/boulders; moram is being illegally extracted from Mohammadganj Forest area; soil near the Railway track are being excavated for use in the road construction work. Villagers of Kadal Kurmi have also protested against the poor quality of the work. They have also represented on 15.02.2016 before the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau. Report has also been published in the newspapers. Despite inquiry conducted by the District Authorities, the same materials of low quality are being used by the agency. Villagers are suffering a lot on account of poor execution of work. Petitioner has raised this issue in larger public interest and does not bear personal grudge against any of the Respondents. He has attributed apathy on the part of State authorities towards execution of the work. 4. The Respondent State has filed a counter affidavit on 15.07.2017, sworn by the Executive Engineer, State Highways Authority of Jharkhand (SHAJ). According to the Respondents, this road was earlier under the jurisdiction of Water Resource Department, Government of Jharkhand. Thereafter, it was transferred to Road Construction Department in January 2013. Considering its importance and dilapidated condition including existing bridge and culverts, widening and strengthening work was taken up by the Road Construction Department. The technical sanction of the project for Rs. 135,53,18,000/- was accorded by the Chief Engineer, Central Design Organization, RCD vide letter dated 30.05.2014. Thereafter, it was transferred to Road Construction Department in January 2013. Considering its importance and dilapidated condition including existing bridge and culverts, widening and strengthening work was taken up by the Road Construction Department. The technical sanction of the project for Rs. 135,53,18,000/- was accorded by the Chief Engineer, Central Design Organization, RCD vide letter dated 30.05.2014. Administrative approval for the renovation work was accorded for Rs. 128,71,14,000/- vide letter dated 12.03.2015 bearing letter No. 1797(S). Pursuant to the tender process, work was awarded to the Respondent No. 12 for an amount of Rs. 116,42,99,917/- vide letter dated 15.10.2015. The date of Agreement is 10.11.2015; the date of commencement is 14.12.2015; time of completion of the project is two years up to 13.12.2017; the defect liability period is of three years from the date of completion of the work; overall physical progress up to 19.06.2017 is 71.72% the details of progress of the work have been indicated at para-9, which reads as under:- "i. The road work of about 20 km. Road length out of total 35 km. is almost complete. ii. Remaining 10 km. Road length is on verge of completion, only top layer wearing course is left to be laid. iii. 7 nos. of bridges out of total 9 nos. of bridges are complete. The work in remaining 2 nos. of bridge is under progress. iv. It is to construct 80 nos. of culverts out of 88 nos. of culvert as per site conditions. 76 nos. of culverts are completed till date. The work of remaining 4 nos. culverts are under progress." Photographs have also been annexed in support thereof. State Highways Authority of Jharkhand has appointed EDMAC Engineering Consultant (India) Pvt. Ltd. as supervision consultant through open bidding process. Their office is situate at Japla. Team of supervision consultant is also furnished therein. They also have detailed the designation of sub professionals working to assist the supervision work. Responsibility of the supervision consultant like regular checking for quality assurance, use of approved construction materials and source of construction materials, maintenance of standard and consistency in quality, has also been mentioned in the counter affidavit. Consultant is to inspect the work regularly during the defect liability period and also to issue direction to the contractor for rectification of defects necessary, if any, and prepare the Bills during construction period. Consultant is to inspect the work regularly during the defect liability period and also to issue direction to the contractor for rectification of defects necessary, if any, and prepare the Bills during construction period. The contractor has to maintain the road during the defect liability period which is three years from the completion of work at his own cost. Further details relating to use of boulders and stone materials, as per Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Earth from the approved borrow area, regular test of the materials being used, are furnished at Para-15 of the counter affidavit. The Executive Engineer, Road Division, Daltonganj has conducted an inquiry on number of dates as per on-line complain received from Mukhyamantri Jansamvad Kendra, Jharkhand. Inquiry revealed that that the allegations were baseless. Director, Quality Control, Ranchi has also conducted an inspection regarding quality of the work in January 2017. His observations have also been complied by the contractor, Annexures-C & D are in support thereof. 5. Learned counsel for the State submits that execution of the work is being carried out, as per the terms and conditions of the Agreement and is most likely to be completed by the schedule time. Therefore, the grievances of the petitioner and other residents of the area have been duly taken care of. The instant PIL has served its purpose, if any, and may be disposed of as such, in view of the stand of the Respondents. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner who was earlier also granted time to ascertain the fact and file a response, has not been able to furnish any reply by today. He however has prayed for further time. 7. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties in the light of the relevant materials on record, and referred to herein-above. Considering the stand of the Respondents that the work is being executed with all sincerity and maintenance of quality standard and is likely to be completed within the stipulated period, we are satisfied that the grievances of the people of the area reflected through the instant PIL, have been adequately addressed. We also find that the agency is under obligation to maintain the road also for the defect liability period of 36 months after the date of its completion, which is November 2017. 8. We also find that the agency is under obligation to maintain the road also for the defect liability period of 36 months after the date of its completion, which is November 2017. 8. In that view of the mater, instant Public Interest Litigation is disposed with the observation that the Respondent authorities would continue to monitor and ensure that the work is completed within time and as per the quality control standard and that it is maintained during the defect liability period. Writ petition (PIL) disposed of.