The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.25014 of 2025 M/s. D.D. Builders Limited, Kalahandi … Petitioner Mr. Sidhant Dwibedi, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha and others … Opposite Parties Mr. Debashis Tripathy, Additional Government Advocate
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No.
Decision
ORDER 15.12.2025 02. 1. Non-disbursal of amount relatable to price escalation has given rise to the filing of this writ petition invoking provisions of Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. Sri Sidhant Dwibedi, learned counsel for the petitioner, referring to averments made in the writ petition, submitted that the petitioner had been declared lowest successful bidder in the tender for the work namely “Construction of Right Main Extension Canal from RD.00M to 960M including structures Lining Works & Service Road” of Upper Indravati Irrigation Project. As per agreement the petitioner was required to commence the work from 26.12.2006 and complete the same by 25.06.2009. 3. However, there was a delay in execution of the work owing to non-availability of land and inaccessibility to the work site during rainy season. This led the petitioner to seek for extension of time to complete the work, which was extended up to 25.06.2010 by the Page 1 of 5 Chief Engineer, Upper Indravati Irrigation Project, Khatiguda in the district of Nabarangpur vide Office Order dated 22.03.2010. The petitioner, having completed the work within the extended period, claimed for consideration of disbursal of amount because of escalation of prices. 3.1. As such claim was not heeded to, a writ petition bearing W.P.(C) No.1419 2009 was filed, wherein this Court vide order dated 13.02.2009 directed the Executive Engineer, Right Canal Division No.-II, Junagarh, Kalahandi to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner within the period stipulated therein. The Authority was brought to the notice of the circular dated 03.04.2007 issued by Works Department along with other clarificatory circulars issued on 19.11.2019 and 08.11.2021. 4. It is vehemently contended by learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to one of the circulars dated 08.11.2021 that the circular dated 03.04.2007 issued by the Works Department for the above said purpose still holds the field to consider release of escalation prices. Though persistent requests have been made to the Authority concerned, the same is not attended to. With constraint, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition. 5. Heard Sri Sidhant Dwibedi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Debashis Tripathy, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the opposite parties. 6. Perusal of record shows that the Government of Odisha has been issuing circulars clarifying the position with regard to escalation Page 2 of 5 prices to be released in favour of the contractors condoning the delay in completion of work owing to certain circumstances which were beyond the control of such contractors. 7. Referring to the following clarification vide Letter No.IIM- 06/2021/27014/WR dated 15.10.2022 issued by the Department of Water Resources, it is highlighted at the Bar that: “*** *** *** Sl. No. Clarification sought for Views of Works Department i • Clarification on escalation claims prior to 07.07.2012 and copy of circular in force. if any by In respect of escalation claims prior to 07.07.2012, the issues may be decided taking into account the directions of Hon’ble Court, the Administrative Department concerned case-to-case basis based on on prevailing circulars in force and after due diligence of the claims. The clause in the agreement executed prior to 07.07.2012 has to be verified and accordingly the claim shall be disposed of. • The relevant circular in force at that point of time was Works Department No.Codes-8/06- circular 5608/W dated 03.04.2007. This circular was in force up to 06.07.2012. bearing 8. On consideration of submission of second and final prices collection statement submitted by the petitioner-contractor, the Superintending Engineer, Upper Indravati Right Canal Division No.II, Junagarh on 11th July, 2025 recommended as follows: “OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER UPPER INDRAVATI RIGHT CANAL DIVISION NO-II Page 3 of 5 AT/PO JUNAGARH, DIST-KALAHANDI Lr.No.711/WE To Date._________ The Chief Construction Engineer, Upper Indravati Irrigation Project, At/PO.Mukhiguda, Dist:-Kalahandi Sub:- Submission of 2nd and final price escalation Statement for the work “Construction of Right Extension Main Canal from RD-00 M to 960 M including structure, lining works and service road” vide Agreement No-153F2/2006-07. Ref:-1. Our office Letter No-684, dated-01.07.2025 2. D.D Builders Ltd 09.07.2025 Sir, In inviting a kind reference to the subject cited above, the above work is awarded to D.D Builders Ltd vide for an agreement amount of agreement no-153F2/2006-07 Rs.11,53,10,309.76/-. The date of commencement and stipulated date of completion of work is dt-26.12.2006 and 25.06.2029 respectively. The EOT has been granted up to 25.06.2010 by Chief Engineer, UIIP, Mukhiguda vide Lr no.II-WE-430/10 dated 22.03.2010. The 2nd and final price escalation statement for the above work amounting to Rs.2,18,69,281.00/- (including GST 18%), has been submitted by D.D. Builders on dated 09.07.2025, is hereby this division on dated-10.07.2025 received recommended for kind approval. in This is for your kind information and necessary action. Encl-1. Price escalation calculation sheet 2. EOT Approval Letter 3. Agreement Copy Yours faithfully, Sd/-Superintending Engineer, U.I.R.C.D. No.-II, Junagarh” 9. It emanates from the record that the aforesaid recommendation for approval is pending since July, 2025 with the Chief Construction Engineer, Upper Indravati Irrigation Project, which Sri Debashis Tripathy, learned Additional Government Advocate did not dispute. Page 4 of 5 10. This Court, having perceived the difficulty of the petitioner and faced with the aforesaid conceded position, felt it prudent to direct concerned opposite party to consider the recommendation of the Superintending Engineer, stated to have been issued vide Letter No.711/WE dated 11.07.2025, within a period of four weeks from the communication of this order. 11. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Chief Justice (Harish Tandon) Judge (M.S. Raman) MRS/Laxmikant Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LAXMIKANT MOHAPATRA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 16-Dec-2025 18:07:48 Page 5 of 5