The Manipur High Court passed series of directions , while disposing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the lawyer, seeking direction to the respondents to complete the balance/remaining work for construction of Capital Complex (Civil Secretariat Component) at Mantripukhri, Imphal, so that the existing Manipur Secretariat may be shifted to the new building and there is no traffic congestion.
The case of the petitioner is that in October, 2010, the work for construction of Civil Secretariat was awarded to a Limited company and since the company was not able to complete the construction work within the stipulated time, the contract was terminated vide letter dated 2.11.2019. Thereafter, on 28.12.2019, the Public Works Department issued a fresh Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) for the Civil Secretariat work, which was also challenged by the Company and finally, the Court, vide judgment and order dated 13.1.2021 directed the parties to have a final joint measurement and after completion of the joint measurement, liberty was given to the State to proceed with the construction of the Civil Secretariat Complex by following the required formalities and procedures as provided by law.
Further case of the petitioner is that as per the joint measurement, the balance work estimation was determined and NIT for the work “Construction of Capital Complex” at Mantripukhri was invited on 19.2.2021 till 15.3.2021 in two-bid system comprising of technical and financial bid. The fourth respondent (contractor) emerged as successful bidder and was awarded the work on 27.5.2021 within a condition to complete the work within 12 months and the contract agreement was also executed between the fourth respondent and the State. The execution of the work was also started by the said firm. However, the said balance work could not be completed by the said firm within the stipulated period and Contractor requested for extension of time and the deadline for completion of the said balance of work was extended upto 30.9.2022. However, the work yet to be completed without assigning any reason. The non-completion of the said work till date is causing inconvenience to the general public passing through the eastern side of the present Manipur Secretariat.
While considering the PIL, Acting Chief Justice M.V. Muralidharan and Justice A. Guneshwar Sharma observed that the grievance of the petitioner is that due to parking of vehicles along both sides of the National Highway in front of the Secretariat, there is traffic congestion, which is mainly for the reason of non-completion of the construction work of Civil Secretariat Component. Therefore, a direction may be issued to the official respondents to complete the balance work of Capital Complex (Civil Secretariat Component) at Mantripukhri, Imphal within a time frame.
The official respondents contended that no representation was submitted by the petitioner to the authorities for remedial action before filing the public interest litigation and on that sole ground, the present public interest litigation is liable to be dismissed. On the traffic congestion alleged by the petitioner, the official respondents said that the vehicles parked on the National Highway-102 in front of the Manipur Secretariat are managed by the Imphal Municipality and action is being taken against the vehicles parked illegally.
The non-submission of the representation to the respondent authorities for remedial measures before filing the public interest litigation would not in any way technically affect the present petition for the simple reason that the cause brought to the notice of the Court by the petitioner by way of this public interest litigation assumes larger public interest. There is no quarrel that if anyone wants to take up the matter that demands Government action, he has to first raise that issue with the authorities, bring it to their knowledge and ask them how are they going to solve it, for which he has to send a representation in the first place to authorities. But in the case on hand, the situation is traffic congestion within the heart of Imphal City, particularly, eastern side of the present Manipur Secretariat along the National Highway, which has been witnessed by the Government officials, including the police personnel day in and day out. The work contractor, namely the fourth respondent, also stated that if the subject project is completed, the traffic will be decongested form the Highway adjacent to the existing Secretariat. When such being the statement of the fourth respondent and the traffic congestion alleged by the petitioner in the present public interest litigation is not vague, the non-submission of representation by the petitioner to the respondent authorities for remedial measures before filing the public interest litigation is not affected the case of the petitioner , the Bench observed.
The Court has to be satisfied about (a) the credentials of the applicant; (b) the prima facie correctness or nature of information given by him; and (c) the information being not vague and indefinite. The information should show gravity and seriousness involved. The Court has to strike balance between two conflicting interests –
(i) nobody should be allowed to indulge in wild and reckless allegations besmirching the character of others; and
(ii) avoidance of public mischief and to avoid mischievous petitions seeking to assail, for oblique motives, justifiable executive actions. In such case, however, the Court cannot afford to be liberal.
“It has to be extremely careful to see that under the guise of redressing a public grievance, it does not encroach upon the sphere reserved by the Constitution to the Executive and the Legislature. The Court has to act ruthlessly while dealing with imposters and busy bodies or meddlesome interlopers impersonating as public spirited holy men. They masquerade as crusaders of justice. They pretend to act in the name of Pro Bono Publico, though they have no interest of the public or even of their own to protect. “
Since the Court was satisfied with the credentials of the petitioner, prima facie correctness of the information given by him and also the information given by the petitioner being not vague, the present public interest litigation at the hands of the petitioner is a bona fide one.
Further the Court noted that it is the admitted case of both sides that the delay in completion of the Civil Secretariat work has caused traffic congestion on the Highway adjacent to the existing Secretariat as both halves of the National Highway in front of the Secretariat are occupied by the parked vehicles of the officers/employees and securities of VIPs. The said traffic congestion has led to inconvenience to the public passing through the eastern side of the present Secretariat.
Though the Civil Secretariat work was started in the year 2010 and even after about 13 years, the same has not been completed and there appears to be a blame by the fourth respondent contractor on the respondent officials qua lack of timely payment and delay by the Public Works Department in approving the rates of the deviations and extra items , held by the Bench.
Though the Additional Advocate General submitted that there is more to recover than to pay to the fourth respondent and the completion of the project is not related with the payment to the fourth respondent, nothing has been produced to prove the same, except the status of payment of bills, which is a self-styled note prepared and signed by the Executive Engineer, Building Division No.I, PWD, Manipur. On the basis of such self-styled undated note, it cannot be contended that excess payments were made to the fourth respondent. The State Government has to be a role model in settling the contractor for the work done by them and because of non-payment, the work cannot be delayed, as the contractor has to pay salaries to its employees for their hard work done and settle the material cost to the traders.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the larger public interest involved, the PIL is disposed of by the High Court with the following directions:
“(i) The respondent State is directed to decongest the traffic on the National Highway in front of the Old Manipur Secretariat by making arrangements for proper park of vehicles on both sides. Further, the respondent State is directed to strictly enforce the traffic rules to ensure illegal parked vehicles are booked.
(ii) The respondent State and the fourth respondent are directed to comply with their contractual obligations qua the completion of construction of Civil Secretariat work.
(iii) The respondent State is directed to pay the Outstanding dues as per the RA Bills raised by the respondent No. 4 and also approve the rates of deviations and extra items regarding the Civil Secretariat work at earliest.
(iv) The respondent State and the fourth respondent are directed to co-operate and work in concert with each other to ensure that the Civil Secretariat work is to be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(v) There will be no order as to costs.”