NKP 2078, Vol.

2/3, Decision No 10645

Prolongation Cost Part

After studying the writ petition, it seems that the petitioner claim as the decision is to
pay the Prolongation Cost and Price Adjustment to the Opposition Construction, as the
petitioner has to pay tens of millions rupees from the state treasury, which is against
public interest. If any agency of the state enters into any kind of agreement with another
person or organization while taking any service or doing any work, the agency of the
state that makes the agreement must also comply with the said agreement. The
agreement between the parties is made on an equal status. In case of violation of the
agreement made on equal status, it does not matter whether the said body is a
government body or not. Even looking at the decision of the arbitrator, it is not
considered that the claim will reach all the issues raised by the construction company.
When one department of the state, as a legal person, enters into a construction contract
with another legal person, there can be no argument that both parties have to bear the
obligations according to the contract. It is not against the public interest if such a body
has to bear the responsibility just because it is a government body. Even in this dispute,
it cannot be interpreted that the decision is against the public interest just because the
arbitrator decided that the petitioner road department should bear the obligations
arising from the contract.

On the other hand, when constructing a construction contract the employer naturally
has the belief and expectation that the employer will provide the drawing design on
time and it is also the responsibility of the employer to provide the drawing design on
time. Since the petitioner could not provide the drawing design on time and therefore
had to pay the prolongation cost and the adjustment price since the payment has to be
done from the state fund, the claim that the said decision is against the public interest
cannot be justified. The fact that the agreement reached in the same status does not have
a favorable decision does not mean that the decision of the arbitrator is against the
public interest. The decision seems to have been made by the arbitrators in accordance
with the terms of the agreement between two parties. It does not appear that the
decision was taken by the arbitrator out of the context of the agreement. The contract is
agreed upon by both parties and the conditions mentioned in the contract are binding
on both parties. Therefore, the decision made by the arbitrator will be final subject to
the conditions mentioned in the contract.