Life Of Inhabitants Becoming Unlivable, Contractors Utilizing Public Money Cannot Be Seen To Make Poor Constructions: Karnataka HC
The Karnataka High Court has observed that the contractors undertaking construction utilizing public money cannot be seen to make constructions that are very poor as a result of which the life of such inhabitants is becoming unlivable.
A Single Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna held, “It is rather surprising how the Engineers of the Corporation or the Engineers concerned have cleared the bills without inspecting the construction and the quality of construction, as complaints have arisen immediately after the completion certificate is issued. The Police Gruha 2020 scheme is not a private project or private scheme. It is a scheme funded by the Government. If it is a scheme funded by the Government, it is public money. Therefore, contractors undertaking construction utilizing public money cannot be seen to make constructions that are very poor and the life of such inhabitants there becoming unlivable”
The Bench further said that it has in a plethora of cases come across contractors undertaking shoddy constructions, particularly of the low-income group (LIG) and mid-income group (MIG) houses, in certain cases, even in high-income group (HIG) houses.
Senior Advocate Jayakumar S. Patil appeared on behalf of the petitioner while Senior Advocate G. Papi Reddy and Advocate Prakash G. Pawar appeared on behalf of the respondents.
Brief Facts -
The petitioner i.e., a construction company was knocking at the doors of the court seeking to stall the act of the Karnataka State Police Housing and Infrastructure Development Corporation (‘Corporation’ for short) in encashing the Bank Guarantee of Rs. 1,15,13,500/- and sought a mandamus directing the respondents to restore/refund the bank guarantee that was encashed along with interest at 18% per annum. It was the case of the petitioner that it had abundant experience in the construction of all projects in lump sum on a turnkey basis and likewise, the Board of the Corporation awarded a contract in favour of the petitioner for the purpose of construction of 144 Police Quarters under a particular scheme (Police Gruha 2020 Scheme).
The petitioner claimed to have successfully completed the project among several other projects of the Corporation at various places. The operation of the defect liability period and the alleged shoddy construction upon which the Corporation encashed the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner at the time of construction in furtherance of the contract led to the petitioner approach the court and the issue thus, in the petition, was not with regard to any other fact of the contract between the parties but confined to whether the act of the Corporation in encashing the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner was in tune with the contract or illegal.
The High Court in view of the above facts noted, “… what would unmistakably emerge is that the Bank Guarantee is not furnished for, it to be photo-framed and hung on the wall, it has a purpose. The purpose is redeemed by the Corporation and cannot be found fault with.”
The Court said that it is for the State to take care that proper constructions are made under any scheme which involves public money so that the same is not misused by such contractors who undertake such constructions and bring those Engineers to books who would approve such shoddy constructions, as and when it is found.
Accordingly, the Court rejected the plea.
Cause Title- PG Setty Construction Technology Pvt. Ltd. v. The Managing Director & Ors.
