Connect with us

News

Lalong’s Legacy Projects: Lalong reaffirms stand on Termination of contract with Bleneson Services

editor

Published

on

Lalong legac

The Plateau State Government has maintained its stand for terminating the services of Bleneson Services Nig LTD, for the Lalong Legacy Project, saying the termination remains valid and irreversible.

The commissioner of information and communication for Plateau state, Mr, Dan Manjang, said this in a statement in Jos on Tuesday while reacting to a recent statement from the contracting firm.

Recall that the Managing Director services of Bleneson Services Nig LTD, Engr Lawson Ngoa in a statement earlier stated that Plateau State Government has not terminated its contract and therefore has no right in re-awarding the same contract as the matter was before the court of law.

However, in a swift reaction, Dan Manjang stated that the Managing Director of the erstwhile contracting Firm, Engr Lawson NGO of Bleneson Services, made spurious, false, and misleading allegations against the Plateau State Government over the termination of the Contract and its re-award to a new Contractor with a view to misleading the Public, currying undeserved sympathy and unfairly disparaging the Government of Plateau State.

Dan Manjang Further stated;

Among other things, the said Engr. Ngoa claimed that the Government has no right to terminate the Contract “while he is still alive” and that there is a pending case before the Court on the matter.

Although he did not State the Court where his case is pending or the nature of the case and the reliefs he seeks, the Government has found it necessary to put the records straight before he gets away with his misleading assertions.

The commissioner for information went on to buttress key points itemizing them below, as follows:

1. Sequel to the failure of the contractor to deliver the projects within agreed Timelines, the Plateau State Government issued a Notice of Termination of the Contract with Bleneson Services Ltd “the Contractor” (not Egnr. Lawanson Ngoa), via a Letter on 9th March 2021 in line with the letters and spirit of the Agreement of the Parties which allowed either Party to terminate the Contract upon giving appropriate Notice as stipulated under the Contract.

2. Upon receipt of the Notice of Termination, Bleneson neither responded nor contested the reason for the Termination as given by the Plateau State Government in the Letter.

3. After the period of Notice of Termination had elapsed without any response or reaction from Bleneson, the Government of Plateau State considered the Termination as concluded, with some having been accepted by conduct, by the silence of the Contractor.

4. Indeed, after the Termination, (and this fact is verifiable), Bleneson Services Ltd evacuated all its Materials, Machinery and Staff from the Project Sites and moved them out of the State.

5. It was after therefore clearly an afterthought that Bleneson went to Court to seek Orders of Injunction supposedly to stop the Plateau State Government from terminating the Contract- a Contract already Terminated vide the State’s Letter of Termination, dated 9th March 2021. This was clearly a futile effort to invalidate the completed termination. It was therefore no surprise that the High Court of Plateau State denied Bleneson the Ex-parte Orders sought by the State Government, as no Court of Law can restrain an act that is already completed!

6. Eventually, based on a Notice of Preliminary Injunction filed in the Suit on account of Bleneson’s refusal to abide by the Pre-action Protocol required to be issued by every Litigant before the commencement of the Suit, the High Court of Plateau State, after hearing the Objection struck out the Suit.

7. Rather than comply with the requirement of the Rules of Court in order to qualify to reinstitute the Suit by doing what the Company ought to have done ab initio -,i.e, approaching the Plateau State Government in writing with its claims, which if not amicably resolved will then confer on it the right to institute a Suit of damages, Bleneson chose to appeal the Ruling of the Court to the Court of Appeal, which said Appeal is still pending.

8. It is instructive that the Contract with Bleneson is a Contract for the provision of Services, which each party could have Terminated or even repudiated, whether rightly or wrongly. Bleneson has no right under the Law to insist on carrying out a Contract the State has clearly evinced an intention not to allow it to continue with. It is within the State’s right to do so. By continuing with its work, Plateau State Government is not in breach of any Court Order. If there was any, Engr. Ngoa would have cited it during his Press Conference.

9. Upon successful termination of the Contract and repossession of the Project Sites, Plateau State Government, in line with the Terms of the Contract, wrote Bleneson to come forward for a Meeting towards the appointment of an Independent Valuer to ascertain claims (if any) and to facilitate reconciliation of Accounts as envisaged, which Invitation Bleneson rebuffed!

10. Bleneson flatly refused to come forward and indeed Engr Lawson Ngoa threatened physical harm to Staff of the Plateau State Government who went to dispatch Letters of Invitation to its Office in Abuja to that effect. Even Staff of Courier Companies were threatened with physical harm if they dared come to Blenson’s Office to deliver such Mails! The State Government has the Managing Director of Bleneson on Tape issuing Threats of physical harm against our Staff. To think that the same person now claims the Plateau State Government never invited him for any resolution Meeting is the height of mischief by someone we have since come to know as a Serial Liar!

11. No one should be fooled by the misleading and false claims by the Managing Director of Bleneson that the termination was done behind them or they were not invited to make their claims. On the contrary, the company and its management chose to ignore the invitation perhaps to have sufficient reasons to play to the gallery in an attempt to blackmail the Government.

12. Following the refusal of Bleneson to Cooperate and put forward its claims for work done or losses incurred (if any), Stakeholders in the project met and took a decision to invite the President of the Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors (NIQS) to appoint an Independent Valuer to assess the level of work done to allow for reconciliation of Accounts.

13. The task was successfully carried out and a Report was submitted which is available for Bleneson to access anytime it is willing to engage with the State.

12. Following the refusal of Bleneson to Cooperate and put forward its claims for work done or losses incurred (if any), Stakeholders in the project met and took a decision to invite the President of the Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors (NIQS) to appoint an Independent Valuer to assess the level of work done to allow for reconciliation of Accounts.

13. The task was successfully carried out and a Report was submitted which is available for Bleneson to access anytime it is willing to engage with the State.

14. Because the records are intact and the fact that the process of terminating the contract was painstakingly followed in line with due process, the doors of the Plateau State Government are still open for Bleneson to come forward with any claims for debt, damages, or losses incurred (if any) as a result of the Termination.

15. As for the Termination of the Contract which is for Services, the Plateau State Government has exercised its rights as enshrined in the contract and has given Bleneson ample opportunity to take advantage of the same terms.

16. The Contract with Bleneson, therefore, stood terminated and irreversible upon the expiration of the Notice of Termination. Bleneson and its Managing Director are at liberty to continue to live in Denial! What is more, the Plateau State Government has since taken possession of its Sites and found another Contractor to complete the Projects which could not be delivered by Bleneson as agreed in the erstwhile Contract.

17. To think that Bleneson and his array of Lawyers are pretending to be unaware of the elementary position of our Law that you cannot force a mere Contract of Service on an unwilling Party and that Bleneson’s remedy lies in a Claim for Damages for wrongful Termination only (if any) is a crying Shame! It is noteworthy that despite the finality of the Termination by the State, Bleneson and his Lawyers are yet to file any Case in pursuit of what is his actual due, assuming the Termination was wrongful – a Claim for Damages, resorting instead to instituting a multiplicity of Court Cases seeking to restrain an act that has already been completed and can no longer be restrained! Bleneson has sadly added to this, a media campaign hype of misinformation, lies, and mischief.

18. The Government of Plateau State wishes to make it categorically clear that it refuses to join Bleneson in its aimless and foolish Voyage to nowhere, in the process of which the Company is serially abusing the process of our Courts of Law.

19. Members of the Public are therefore advised to ignore any Media gymnastics and misinformation by Bleneson and its Managing Director Engr. Lawanson Ngoa seeks to turn facts on their head with a view to attracting the former Contractor’s undeserved sympathy and unnecessary attention.

20. Bleneson‘s Managing Director is assured that the Doors of the State Government remain Open for discussions and resolution of all post-Contract issues with Bleneson, whenever that Company and its Management are ready for such discussions.

21. The Plateau State Government reassures the Public and the good Citizens of the State that all steps taken so far by her with respect to the Lalong Legacy Project are strictly in line with the Terms of its Contract with Bleneson Services Nigeria Limited; in the best interest of our State and perfectly within the Laws of Nigeria.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Battle to stop Tinubu is battle of no retreat, no surrender – Melaye

info

Published

on

By

Melaye.jpeg

Senator Dino Melaye, a chieftain of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) in Kogi State, has criticised President Bola Tinubu’s decision to serve as chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC) Presidential Campaign Council for the 2027 election.

Melaye insisted that the campaign to prevent Tinubu’s re-election must continue with renewed determination despite his many strategies.

He spoke in a video posted on his official X account on Sunday, questioning the decision to have Tinubu serve as both the APC presidential candidate and chairman of his campaign council.

“This is the first time in the history of the universe and the entire world that a presidential candidate of a political party will double as the chairman of the presidential campaign council for his own election,” Melaye said.

He described the arrangement as “disgraceful”, alleging that it showed a lack of confidence within the ruling party.

“It shows they are jittery. It shows they are afraid,” he said.

Melaye also criticised the size and structure of the campaign council, describing it as “very, very, very bogus” and alleging that some committees and positions had been duplicated.

The ADC chieftain further questioned the reported appointment of Zacch Adedeji, chairman of the Nigerian Revenue Service (NRS), formerly the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), to a fundraising position in Tinubu’s campaign council.

“The chairman of FIRS is the deputy director in charge of fundraising of presidential campaign of Tinubu,” Melaye alleged.

He argued that the appointment could create a conflict of interest because the NRS chairman is a public official responsible for revenue collection.

“Is there no conflict in this? As a lawyer, by the grace of God, on Monday I’m going to court. We have to test that,” he said.

Melaye said he would challenge the matter in court, arguing that public officials are expected to comply with the provisions of the Public Service Rules.

“If that is not conflict of interest, I don’t know what else it would be,” he said.

He vowed to continue opposing Tinubu’s re-election bid, declaring that “the battle to stop Tinubu is a battle of no retreat, no surrender.”

Melaye described the development as “a big shame” and “a disgrace” as political parties intensify preparations for the 2027 presidential election.

Continue Reading

News

Two years after launch, Walmart’s Flipkart is closing in on India’s quick-commerce leaders

info

Published

on

By

Flipkart minutes.jpg

Indian startups spent years getting consumers accustomed to having groceries and everyday goods delivered within minutes. Now Walmart-owned Flipkart is rapidly closing the gap with those quick-commerce pioneers, as global rival Amazon mounts its own push into instant delivery.

Flipkart Minutes, which debuted in August 2024 as the e-commerce giant’s foray into quick commerce, is now delivering 1.1 million to 1.2 million orders a day, up from about 390,000 to 400,000 in November, people familiar with the matter told TechCrunch. That puts the two-year-old service close to Swiggy’s Instamart, which is delivering about 1.4 million orders a day, according to a person familiar with its operations.

The gap is notable as Flipkart is a relative latecomer to a market whose top ranks have been dominated by Instamart, Blinkit, and Zepto. Food-delivery giant Swiggy launched Instamart in 2020 and Zepto arrived the following year, both during the pandemic, while Blinkit traces its roots to online grocery platform Grofers, founded in 2013. The three have since established themselves as India’s top quick-commerce players.

Blinkit continues to dominate the market with around 3.4 million to 3.6 million daily orders, followed by Zepto at about 2.4 million to 2.6 million, per recent estimates from market research firm Datum Intelligence. Flipkart is now rapidly narrowing the gap with Instamart, the smallest of the three established leaders by order volume.

Instamart still has substantial scale. Earlier this month, Swiggy said the quick commerce service has more than 14 million monthly transacting users and operates over 1,200 dark stores across over 130 cities. The company has also been narrowing Instamart’s contribution-margin losses, with more than 45% of its dark-store network now contribution-margin positive.

Nonetheless, Flipkart has fueled that growth with an aggressive expansion of its delivery infrastructure. Minutes now operates about 1,020 to 1,050 micro-fulfillment centers — essentially small warehouses located close to customers specially to handle quick deliveries — up from 600 in January and about 340 a year ago, one of the sources told TechCrunch. The company is adding around 100 such facilities a month, the source said, aiming to have 1,500 by the end of 2026.

Flipkart’s advantage goes beyond adding dark stores. The company can tap an enormous pool of existing e-commerce customers it has already spent years and billions of dollars acquiring, giving Minutes a ready audience for faster deliveries, Satish Meena, an adviser at Datum Intelligence, told TechCrunch.

“Flipkart is already a serious player,” Meena said. “Once you open 1,000 dark stores and [are] doing a million orders per day, it’s serious enough.”

Minutes is also seeing customers return and shop more frequently. About 65% to 70% of customers making purchases on the service each month are repeat buyers, while transactions per customer have increased 50% to 60% from a year earlier, people familiar with the matter said.

Those customers are spending an average of about ₹400 to ₹500 (about $4.20–$5.20) per order, with fruits and vegetables, staples, dairy, and meat among the fast-growing categories, the sources said. Flipkart is also expanding its selection of higher-end gourmet products, including organic and artisanal items, as it looks to capture more of customers’ spending on Minutes.

Even as Minutes has expanded, its average delivery time has fallen to about 11 minutes, from 13 minutes a year ago, one of the sources told TechCrunch.

A battle for India’s shoppers

Flipkart’s growth comes as quick commerce takes a bigger role in how Indians shop online, even as broader consumer demand has shown signs of weakness. In a recent report, Bernstein analysts said while the country’s consumption growth softened in July, a shift toward quick commerce and e-commerce continued, with quick-commerce platforms recording healthy growth in monthly active users.

Similar to Flipkart, Amazon is striving to gain its share in the Indian quick-commerce market. The Seattle-based company has been expanding Amazon Now, its quick-commerce service, as it seeks to bring the instant-delivery model to its existing e-commerce customer base.

During CEO Andy Jassy’s visit to India in June, Amazon stated that Now became its fastest-growing business in India, with orders doubling every quarter since launch. The company also laid out plans to take the service to more than 300 cities and set up a network of more than 1,000 micro-fulfilment centers, alongside larger facilities aimed at expanding the range of products it can deliver within minutes.

Amazon, Flipkart, Swiggy, Zepto, and Blinkit parent Eternal did not respond to requests for comment.

The quick commerce expansion is increasingly defensive as well as offensive for both Flipkart and Amazon, Meena told TechCrunch. As consumers grow accustomed to receiving certain purchases almost immediately, the e-commerce giants risk losing those transactions to specialist quick-commerce platforms if they cannot offer comparable speed.

“Can you go back to scheduled delivery now in grocery? No,” Meena said. “You will not go back.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

Continue Reading

Trending