Sunday, September 19, 2021
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe
Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

Uttarakhand High Court orders adverse comments against army contractor to be removed

A Single Bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Tewari while considering the Petition held that since Chief Engineer, Military Engineering Services, Bareilly Zone has himself recommended for removing the adverse remarks of slow progress mentioned against the name of the Petitioner in the quarterly workload return and now the final decision is to be taken by Chief Engineer Central Command.

Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

The Uttarakhand High Court on Thursday gave directions to the effect that adverse comments against a contractor may be removed because the contractor had not delayed completion of a project on purpose, but because of reasons beyond its control. The court directed the chief engineer, Central Command to pass appropriate orders on the recommendation made by the chief engineer, Military Engineering Services, Bareilly Zone within two weeks.

The Petitioner is a partnership firm that deals in civil construction work and is enlisted with Military Engineering Services. Petitioner was awarded two contracts, namely:

(i) Construction of Baffle Range at Dehradun and
(ii) Construction work.

Sandeep Kothari, Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the first Contract, namely, Construction of Baffle Range was to be completed on or before 31.12.2020 and the said work was completed by the Petitioner well within the stipulated time.
Regarding the second work, namely, Construction work for Second Arty Regt at Birpur, Dehradun, Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that initially, the second work was to be completed on or before 29.08.2021. However, subsequently, the said deadline was extended by the Competent Authority up to 5th March 2022, due to the collapse of the bridge leading to the construction site and various other reasons.

Thus, according to the Petitioner, there is no delay on the part of the Petitioner in executing the work, therefore, the remarks made against the name of the Petitioner in the quarterly workload return for Contractors that Petitioner is not capable to handle more load due to slow progress is uncalled for and is liable to be removed.

Pankaj Chaturvedi, Central Government Standing Counsel, on instructions, submitted that the Office of Chief Engineer, Military Engineering Services, Bareilly Zone has recommended to Chief Engineer Central Command to remove the adverse remarks mentioned against the name of the Petitioner in the quarterly workload return issued on 17.03.2021. He further submitted that Petitioner had executed the work pursuant to the first contract well within time and regarding the second work, he stated that the deadline, initially fixed, has not expired as yet and the Competent Authority has further extended the deadline to 05.03.2022.

A Single Bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Tewari while considering the Petition held that since Chief Engineer, Military Engineering Services, Bareilly Zone has himself recommended for removing the adverse remarks of slow progress mentioned against the name of the Petitioner in the quarterly workload return and now the final decision is to be taken by Chief Engineer Central Command.

Read Also: Covid second wave: Uttarakhand HC says Centre’s duty to rush to help states

“Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 1 (Chief Engineer Central Command) to pass appropriate order, in accordance with the law, on the recommendation made by respondent no. 2 (Chief Engineer, Military Engineering Services, Bareilly Zone) as early as possible but not later than two weeks from today” , the order reads.

Source: ILNS

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.

News Update

Supreme Court refuses relief to NLSIU student who wasn’t promoted due to uncleared exams

A two-judge bench of Supreme Court said “How long you want that courts should run the institutions/universities and why should we interfere?” While relying to the contentions of the petitioners counsel to promote her to final year by way of an opportunity.

NGT directs stoppage of Baitarani river project work of sand filling, embankment, retention wall

According to the order 8 applicants are seeking a direction to the respondents restraining them from the sand filling work of the river basin of Baitarani on the South Bank at the place where river Baitarani bifurcates as Old Baitarani and New Baitarani in the Bhadrak District of Odisha.

Allahabad High Court recalls order listing case of errant advocate before another bench

The Allahabad High Court has recently recalled its order in which it had directed the listing of a matter before another bench citing the "mischievous behaviour of the advocate".

CBI seeks dismissal of petition for separating Director of Prosecution from agency, says post enjoys full autonomy in affidavit

The Central Bureau of Investigation has informed the Delhi High Court that the Directorate of Prosecution has got full autonomy and there is no interference in the functioning of a law officer and it has no decision-making power in the appointment of the Director of Prosecution.

Supreme Court allows appeal against summons issued to invoke power under Section 319 CrPC

The Supreme Court has set aside the summons passed by the Sessions Judge, Khiri saying the Sessions Judge will apply his mind in the light of principles laid down by the Constitution Bench.
Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.