LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/the-state-of-odisha-ors-vs-radheshyam-agrawal-20230324/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Civil · Reportable judgment

The State of Odisha & Ors. vs Radheshyam Agrawal

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
24 March 2023
Case No.
Civil Appeal No. 4934 of 2022
Result
Dismissed
Bench
M.R. Shah, B.V. Nagarathna
Citation
[2023] 3 S.C.R. 653 : 2023 INSC 289
Supreme Court Reports [2023] 3 S.C.R. 653 : 2023 INSC 289
Headnote

Contract – Levy of Penalty – When not justified – Penalty imposed on respondents-Contractors while granting extension of time to complete the work awarded – Held: Penalty was levied by the State Government invoking Clause 3.5.5(v) of the Odisha Public Work Department Code (OPWD Code) – However, said Clause is applicable in a case where the contract is terminated – Here, it is not a case of termination of the contract – Therefore, Clause 3.5.5(v) shall not be applicable at all – Neither the contract nor the OPWD code provides for imposition of penalty while extending the contract – However, in a given case, the State Government might be justified in imposing the penalty while granting the extension but, the contractor must be put to notice that extension of time can be granted on imposition of reasonable penalty – Thus, in the present case, the State was not justified in levying the penalty unilaterally while granting extension of time, without putting the contractor to notice – Levy of penalty while granting extension of time was hence illegal and rightly set aside by the High Court.

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by M. R. SHAH, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in Writ Petition Nos. 14922/2019, 10344/2021 and 20066/2019, by which, the Division Bench of the High Court has allowed the said writ petitions preferred by the respective contractors – original writ petitioners and has set aside the penalty imposed while granting the extension of time to complete the work awarded, the State of Orissa has preferred the present appeals. 2. For the sake of convenience, the fact
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →