IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.34608/2019 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN:
Sapience Consultants And Engineers, Office at No.113/1, Doddabasthi Main Road, Bhuvaneshwari Nagara, Bengaluru-560 056 Represented by Proprietor Sri. M. Pampathy, S/o M. Kumarappa, Aged about 69 years, R/at No.B7-403, Kailash, BDA – Jnanbharthi, Mysore Road, Kengeri, Bengaluru-560 059.
…Petitioner (By Sri. Rajarama S, Advocate) AND:
1. Commissioner, BBMP, Chandra Layout, N.R.Square, Bengaluru-560 056.
2. Chief Engineer, BBMP, Technical Vigilance Committee Cell (TUCC) BBMP, N.R. Square, Bengaluru-560 002.
3. Chief Engineer, BBMP LG-34, Sampige Road, Jai Bheema Nagar, Malleshwaram, Bengaluru-560 003 4. Executive Engineer, BBMP Govindarajanagar, Vijayanagar, Bengaluru-560 040.
...Respondents (By Sri. S.N. Prashanth Chandra, Advocate) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order passed by the respondent No.1 vide Annexure-A dated 26.06.2019 and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law respondent No.1, BBMP and etc., This Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The petitioner institution is consultant and has been working as quality assurer with respect to works being executed by contractors pursuant to work orders by respondent – BBMP. It is stated that the obligations on the petitioner are as found in the contract at Annexure-C. It is submitted that the impugned order has been passed at Annexure-A whereby the petitioner has been black listed on the ground that there has been certain lapses in execution of works by the contractors with respect to works in ward Nos.126, 127, 128 and 131 relating to 48 packages.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo and produced a copy of the order dated 17.07.2019 by the Government of Karnataka wherein the similar order passed as regards contractors has been set aside by the order dated 17.07.2019, noticing that the works with respect to which work order was issued has not yet been completed and that the contractors be given an opportunity to complete the works subject to the stipulations relating to the quality etc. Petitioner is also entitled to be extended the same relief.
3. In light of the order being passed against the contractors and also taking note of the fact that work under the tender is not yet completed. The present impugned order is also liable to be set aside, noticing the same order dated 17.07.2019.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent – BBMP submits that the petitioner to adhere to the terms of contract as regards the petitioner’s obligations as found in Annexure-C insofar as works being executed by the contractors.
5. Accordingly, petition is disposed of and the impugned order at Annexure-A is set aside.
6. However, it is made clear that with respect to completion of works with respect to which work order have been floated, petitioner is to strictly adhere to the terms of the contract at Annexure-C.
Sd/- JUDGE NS