HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY W.P. No. 11205 OF 2013
O R D E R :
This writ petition is filed stating that the petitioner was awarded the work of raising of Ash Dyke from EL+ 196.0 M. to 201.0 M including construction of spill way along with decanted well with RCC barrel within the premises of Rayalaseema Thermal Power Project, owned by the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited. It is further stated that with a view to expand the existing ash pond the first respondent issued Tender Notification dated 23.02.2012 inviting e- tenders to execute the work of RTPP Stage-1, Ash Pond, raising of Ash Dykes from EL+ 196.0 M. to 201.M including construction of spill way along with decanted well with RCC barrel and the estimated contract value was Rs.15,18,11,940/-. The petitioner was the lowest bidder at Rs.12,75,22,028.90 and after complying all the required formalities including furnishing Bank Guarantee etc., the Contract of executing the said work has been awarded in favour of the petitioner company and an agreement dated 26.11.2012 has been entered into between the first respondent and the petitioner company. The petitioner had started execution of the work and completed the construction of Spill Way by raising the Ash Dyke to the required level and at state-2 level, huge quantity of about 80,000 Cum (Cub Meters) of sand is required for execution of the work as well as for filling up the Ash Dyke.
2. It is further stated that the first respondent and the petitioner have signed a standard specifications, drawings etc., provided with the Schedule-A inclusive of Schedule-B, C & D wherein the respondents have caused an estimate of probable quantities and the source of supply of material particularly the source of sand from the approved government quarry has been provided. As per the Schedule-B i.e., Lead Statement, the Lead distance of 7 kms has been specified and the source of supply of material i.e., Sand is notified as Pennar River at the said distance which is the shortest distance from the location. Basing on the said estimated cost including the Lead Statement of distance specified in Schedule-B for procuring the sand, the petitioner quoted the said estimated value and submitted its tender.
3. When the petitioner proposed to procure the sand from the approved sand quarry which is specified in Schedule-B at a distance of 7 kms from the site, it was informed by the respondents that in view of the recent change in the policy in quarrying the sand the State Government imposed ban on quarrying the sand on the Pennar river, it is not permissible to quarry the sand at the specified location contained in the Schedule-B and that the government has approved the new location at Submersible areas of Gandikota Reservoir near Kondapuram which is at a distance of about 45 kms from the Ash Dyke site for quarrying the sand to execute the contract. Therefore, the petitioner has to procure the sand from a distance of about 45 kms which is more than 38 kms specified in the Schedule-B and thereby to incur additional expenditure which was not notified in the Schedule-B or in the tender notification nor in the Agreement signed between the parties. It is further stated that the Government has changed sand quarrying policy basing on the orders dated 21.03.2012 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.18822 of 2011 whereby this Court restrained the respondents therein from giving any sand manual/sand quarrying lease to any person with effect from 01.04.2012 onwards without taking the permission of this Court. Subsequently, the said orders were challenged before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court passed orders giving liberty to the State Government to obtain necessary clearances from the Environment Department to quarry the sand put to public auction and later the State Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.154, dated 15.11.2012 framing new guidelines to quarry sand. The petitioner made several representations dated 07.01.2013, 20.01.2013 and 28.02.2013 duly requesting the respondents to grant extra lead distance i.e., 38 kms over and above the lead mentioned in the Agreement. But the respondents have not considered the same but issued the proceedings dated 02.03.2013. Since, the first respondent has not considered the change in the policy of the government regarding sand quarrying while passing impugned proceedings, the present writ petition is filed.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent.
5. Since it is stated that the petitioner has to procure the sand from a distance of about 45 kms which is more than 38 kms specified in the Schedule-B and thereby to incur additional expenditure which was not notified in the Schedule-B or in the tender notification nor in the Agreement signed between the parties and since it is also stated that while passing the impugned proceedings dated 02.03.2013, the change of policy of State Government in sand quarrying has not been taken into consideration. In view of above facts and circumstances, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to dispose of the representations being filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J January, 23, 2014.
KVS HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY W.P. No.11205 OF 2013
Date: 23-01-2014
KVS