24.10.2012 Views

CONTENTS - Central Public Works Department

CONTENTS - Central Public Works Department

CONTENTS - Central Public Works Department

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

212 SECTION 33<br />

(2) Certain Administrative instructions as regards this clause are given as under:-<br />

(i) Engineer(s) and/or Overseer(s) deployed as per stipulation in the contract shall look after<br />

only the work under contract and no other work and shall be available fully during execution<br />

of work.<br />

(ii) Even if contractor (or partner in case of firm/company) is himself an Engineer/Overseer, it is<br />

necessary on part of contractor to employ Engineer(s) and/or/Overseer for the supervision of<br />

the work(s) as per stipulation.<br />

(iii) The Retired Engineer/Asstt. Engineer who are holding Diploma may be treated at par with<br />

Graduate Engineers for the operation of the Clause.<br />

(3) Requirement of technical staff for a work shall be decided and stipulated in Schedule F as per<br />

guidelines given at Appendix 18.<br />

33.15 Clause 42 of Forms no. CPWD 7 and 8<br />

This clause imposes an obligation on the contractor to manage an effective inventory control of the<br />

expensive and essential stipulated materials, and the resultant consequences in case of non-observance<br />

of diligence in their usage by the contractor. Clause 42 (ii) and (iii) of Forms no. CPWD 7 and 8 lays down<br />

that recovery at a specified rate (higher than the normal issue rates) is to be made from the contractor for<br />

use of cement and steel in excess over the quantity arrived at by theoretical calculation. The intention<br />

behind the clause is that the contractor shall take only the required quantity of materials, and if any such<br />

materials remain unused at the time of completion or determination of the contract, it has to be returned to<br />

the Engineer-in-charge. The clause specifically provides that the material not so returned shall be<br />

recoverable at the rates as specified. The rates so specified forms the reasonable compensation for the<br />

breach of the provisions therein. Thus this particular clause is not in the nature of penalty, but provides a<br />

reasonable compensation. The aggrieved party for the breach of the contract can receive reasonable<br />

compensation, not exceeding the amount so named relating to the excess issue of materials not returned<br />

by the contractor.<br />

33.15.1 Theoretical consumption statement with every bill<br />

(1) In order to operate the provision of this clause effectively, it is necessary that with every running<br />

account bill a statement showing the theoretical requirements of materials for the items of work<br />

done and measured should be prepared and got signed from the contractor at the time of obtaining<br />

his signature on the running account bill, so that he is aware of the basis on which the theoretical<br />

calculations are worked out. It will also enable the <strong>Department</strong> to exercise a broad check over the<br />

consumption of these materials during execution of the work. As already mentioned above, the<br />

recovery at the rates so specified in the clause is for the materials issued in excess over the<br />

quantity which is expected to be used in the work if the material is used with prudence and economy,<br />

and is arrived at through theoretical calculations of the quantity that is required and the quantity<br />

that is not returned by the contractor. The recovery is not for excess consumption. It is therefore<br />

absolutely necessary that a notice in writing should be issued by the Engineer-in-charge to the<br />

contractor to return the materials issued in excess of the theoretical quantity as provided in clauses<br />

42 and 10 of the contract. Only thereafter action for recovery under clause 42 should be taken.<br />

(2) Once the distinction that recovery is for excess over theoretical consumption and not for<br />

consumption in the work becomes clear, it will be inappropriate for the Engineer-in-charge to admit<br />

that the entire quantity of materials issued has actually been consumed in the work. In the counterstatement<br />

of facts in arbitration also, statement such as, “Excess materials have actually been<br />

used in the work”, should never be made.<br />

(3) For non-scheduled items, the decision of the Superintending Engineer regarding theoretical quantities<br />

of materials that should have been actually used shall be final and binding on the contractor.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!