Rakesh Kumar v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation

4 Thlstandoftherespondentwasthatthere-isasplificclausein uponthepartiesand wljch wastoth^ effect that'|e|4ji^|it%||||^;^ bills'ovill l/subject to the availability offundsjnp^^^head ofaccountfrom time to time and the payments shall'brmadefatSrS;queue basis i.e. first the past liabilities will be cleared and after the release ofpayments for past bills only then the case ofthe petitioners would be considered; interest would also notbe payable. y. ■ift 2017:DHC:8341

5 The relevant extract of Clause 7 ofthe 'General Conditions of Contract for Municipal Coiporation ofDelhi Works' highlighted by therespondentCorporation is reproduced herein as under:-. ^ paymentofpassedbills willbesubjectto cn'ailabilityoffundsinparticular time to time in MCD. Paymentofbills shall be strictly on Queue basis I.e.firstthepastliabilitieswillbeclearedandafterthatthereleaseofpaymentfor passedbills bein orderofthedemandreceivedatHQunderparticularheadofaccounts. No interestshallbepayabletotfe^cortfraetorHn^pseofdelayinpaymentonaccountof non-availabilityoffunds4irihe.pmieulfF. "

6 This sfand ofthe'respondenfColoration,the petition.if ff■■' ' ' 1 > j '% hadprogresse|^;andthematter wastobetakenup'foS^ildhearing.

7 Ho|vever, at this stage, as noted supra, attention|)f this Court ! 'II ft has been|rawn to the by the SinglefBench of this Court inrI| RTAsS||^seifout of decrees whichhadenurediyaybunofachlikecontfgrtoSwhohadpreferred to file civil suits instead of filing'writpetitions.

8 Inthe course oftheseproceedings on 07.09.2016, the additional submission ofthe respondent was noted which was that the payments being asked forby thepetitioner areunder 'non-plannedhead' andthe petitioner willhave to standin queue along with others; submission of V t) planned head'and the money under the'non-planned head'is being mis-used i.e. for purpose other than those purposes for which it is required to be used. The respondent had been directed to place on record an affidavitstating the amounts expended in the'non-planned head'. Thisaffidavitisonrecord andthe detailsofmoneysoughtto beexpendedinthe'non-plannedhead'havebeengiven.

9 Courtisof|te^iew.fh4tgea,rdg^^ this Court is.bffhfview thaplfeslpetiti disposed off onthesa|etejmsandcopditionsasthereisnodis|ite|othefactthat thecaseffthesepetitionersissimilartothosewho we4artiesinthe i 1 r.i A -il h '/ s W RFA.

10 The terms;b£ tlje consent order reproduced in ' 0)TheappellanleehaltfileJreehccmpUaUom.completeinallrespectsinrespectofthe respondents and the other contractors, irrespective ofwhether they havefled any appeals/sunsofrecovcyornot.sothatthereisaclarityahou,theirpriorityinihe wait (ti> The appellants under,ahe to strictly adhere to the timeline mentioned in the compilation,forreleasingpaymentslotherespondents. (iv)Theappellantsshallensurethatthe budgetforreleaseofamountsunderthe headof Non-PlanExpenditureisincreasedonaregularbasissothatthereleaseofpaymentscan be expeditedto the respondentsandothercontractors in the waitlist, evenpriorto the datesofpriority mentionedagainsttheir names. (v)The appellantsshalluploadthe compilation on their websitesfor ease ofaccessand ''^Sularly atthe endofeach monthforthe respondentsandothers toknow.what

V. theirstatus is in the wait list. (vi)Having regard to thefact that the appellants expect the respondents to stay their handsandnotpursue theirlegalremediesM execution ofthe impugnedJudgmentsand decieesforaperiodmentioned'1lereinafJer,^itifagreedjthatinterestshallbepayable to the respondentson fruuffHidm^^afterQ^iry^^threeyearsandninetydays reckonedfromtheidate^eWncernedimmi^nhadpassi^^l^cftherespondentsfor payment.Inot^r0lacus^onof90daysisbc^gpr^^HeadQuartersof boththeapppan^rcompletingtheadministrativeworkofr^pf^^anddiarisingthe billsrecetv^fi-onidifferentDivisionsandfrep'aringacombinedlistfppaymentanditis agreedthatprthesaidperiod,nointerestshallbepayabletotheresp^dents. J (vii)It iskfer agreedthat the appellants willnot be liable toply intereston the principal armmts payamffthe respondents undeff^he impugSdjudgments and decrees,for a^^peM^^dHf fearstreckoned £expiry of90 days mentionedabove,'''fIfT-,. f

(viii) However,- above, ifthe amounts remain outstandingfor anyreason wkatsofr^^ihe appellantsshallpay interest@ per annum on the principal amount to the respondents,for the remainingperiod, till realization. (ix)It isfurther agreed that the afor-esaid arrangement ofpayment ofinterest by the appellants @9%per annum on the outstandingprincipal amountto the respondents. shallcontinue onlyforaperiodofPwyears,reckonedjhom theendofthe thirdyearas mentioned in clause(vii)hereinabove. (X)If,hea,now„e,en,a,„payablebytheappellee,,eeventhereafter thereepondenteshall e '"g"!recourseforexecution oftheImpugnedJudgmentsaneldecrees andclam interestonthedecretalamountfrom dayone.

(xi) The respondents undertake that in „/the settlement arrived at vdth the appellants,asrecordedftJ.'A786J20l6&RFA,92m,6Page4of9above,theyshallno, a e any steps toftle execution petitions In respect ofthe impugnedjudgments and "tatterofthepresentappeak.fortheper,odn,entlonedhere,nabove. (xiftMforthealreadypendingexecutionpetitions,orderspassedIntheseproceedings. s allbeplacedonrecordsothattheycan bedisposedofbytheconcernedcourtsonthe bastsofthecontentorder.ivimiSmfrgrap'mneyefpondentstofilefteshexecution pennons,ncaseafpfdultymthejihr,OflhiapffellaSs.asfrbeendetailedabove."

11 Learqeapinselai^garingfortheporpSibJ|4r.SunilGoel) wasalso counselwhohadappeared beforetheRFAljourt.

12. Th|consent ordei anpved dt on 17.11.2016|iter-se those contractors;^and^te;Gc)iora^ WHfW bind th||arties in the present adheretothe thepetitionerswhichis totheeffectthatbesidesthefactthatnopaymentshallbereleased out ofturntoanyparty,aperiod ofthreeyearsand90daysreckonedfrom thedatetheconcerned Divisionhaspassedthe billsoftheContractors forpaymentshall betheperiodfrom which the paymentshallstartto be madeto the contractors. In,other words,a cushion of90days is v./ all administrative works ofreceiving and diarising the bills received from differentDivisions and preparingthe combined listforpayment. Up to three years & 90 days, no interest would be payable by the Department to the contractors. However,even ifafter the expiry of three years, the amounts remain outstanding, the respondent Corporation will pay interest @ 9% per annum on the principal amounttothe contp^thijfbi|th|remmni^ tillrealization. The aforesaid arr^e^ehf for^ Tajfi^nt of int9est\y the respondent Corporation on the outstanding principal Amount to the contract(|s shall continue only for a period oftwo y|ars-reckoned from the ofthethird yearas mentionedinthesub-cluse(vii)and ifthis amount regains, Coloration,even thereafter the^Qon|ra6tofs«will be entitled ^fSdbk'degal recourse by filing an execution ofThe entiremmount.and'Cis order will betreated as a decree which would then become executable. The respondent Corporation has also ensured thatthe budgetforrealization ofamount underthe head of non-planned expenditure' will be increased so that the release ofpaymentto the contractors can be expedited in the wait This Courtthusnotesthattheconsentorderof17.11.2016reproduced m RFA No.786/2016 is modified to the extent that there being no judgment and decree in favourofthe contractors in the presentcase; however all other terms and conditions which the respondent(as appellants in the RFA)has agreed and undertaken will be binding upon them and this order shall be treated as a decree which in the eventuality ofnon-payin^tj(as|erjiJIW detailed supra)shall become execu-t^ble. ''7' A.::.rc,;7, /%,y > V ' J » \

13 Needl^ao state that thislorder passed byJftilsCourt will be fully adhfred to in true letter and spirit byrespondent|o.[1] and will thusnotcpnstrainanyparty:iH^j|g4htheCourtonthlcount. /• _ n -

INDERMEET KAUR,J JANUARY 23,2017 A