In the speaking order passed after the hearing, BMC has once again terminated Roadway Solutions India Infrastructure Ltd‘s (RSIIL) contract and directed that it pay a total penalty of Rs 64.6 crore within 30 days. BMC has also forfeited RSIIL’s 2% contract deposit and 10% earnest money deposit (EMD). BMC stated in its order that it was clear the contractor does not have the ability or the interest in actually carrying out the works.
The work orders were given a day before Prime Minister Narendra Modi performed the ground-breaking ceremony of CC road works along with other BMC projects in Jan 2023. The two-year road concreting mega-contracts were awarded to five companies, including RSIIL.
With RSIIL failing to start work on time and massive delays on its part, its contract was terminated in Nov last year. RSIIL moved HC which stayed the termination. HC earlier last week directed the civic chief to appoint a senior officer of some standing to give a hearing to RSIIL. BMC appointed Ashwini Joshi, additional municipal commissioner (city), as designated officer for the hearing .
“It is seen from the record put up before me that no efforts have been taken by the petitioners to comply with the tender conditions and to complete the specified task before the monsoon. Other than making baseless submissions and relying on letters submitted only to create a record, it is clear that the contractor does not have the ability or the interest in actually carrying out the works. The said project is an essential infrastructure project for the city which envisages a major reduction in the potholes and a major improvement in the condition of the roads,” said Joshi in her order.
“Lack of contractual performance by the contractor is not only causing a breach of contractual terms but is also affecting the lives of the residents of Mumbai at large. The contractor does not have any explanation to the questions put to them other than blaming BMC by finding some excuse or the other.
A contractor is expected to work in tandem with the BMC and its officers and take a proactive role in ensuring the carrying out of the works. Rather, the contractor has chosen to take a pedantic approach by just stating that some letters were submitted and no reply from the BMC was received.
Apart from the said submission being unacceptable in view of the findings above, it also shows that this contractor has no contractual abilities nor the intention to actually work together with the BMC and complete the contract,” the order stated.Joshi noted continuation of the contractual relations is not only against the spirit of the contract, but also detrimental to the infrastructure of the city and to BMC exchequer. “The petitioners failed to show due diligence to comply with the various conditions of contract and to achieve the progress,” the order stated.
