Disposed¶21

M/S Rojina Construction and Another v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC2 Jul 2025WPA/10363/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Calcutta High Court, WPA 10363 of 2022, decided 02.07.2025 by Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.; contractor's payment claim; construction of additional classrooms at Julabditola Primary School, Malda; alleged misappropriation of school funds by Headmaster; District Education Officer / Samagra Shiksha Mission, Malda mentioned by State counsel; writ of mandamus for release of Rs. 5,27,600/-; direction to respondent no. 3 to disburse within eight weeks; petition disposed of, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus-type direction to respondent no. 3 to disburse Rs. 5,27,600/- to Petitioner No. 1 within eight weeks of receipt of a copy of the order; no order as to costs. ¶21

M/S Rojina Construction and Another Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

0207 2025

¶2

WEDNESDAY

¶3

Court : CB-07 Item : DL-05 Bench : SINGLE Matter : WPA Status : DO ID : 266057 AR : NANDY

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE

¶5

WPA10363 OF 2022

¶6

M/S ROJINA CONSTRUCTION & ANR. VS.

¶7

THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

¶8

MR. AMARRENDRA CHAKRABORTY, ADVOCATE MR. DIPAYAN KUNDU, ADVOCATE

¶9

……for the Petitioner

¶10

MS. ANWARI QURAISHI, ADVOCATE

¶11

……for the State

¶12

Petitioner No. 1, a contractor, upon completion of the work assigned to him, moved from pillar to post for release of his payment. However, having received no response, he has been constrained to approach this Hon’ble Court with the present writ petition, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the amount of Rs. 5,27,600/in his favour.

¶13

Petitioner No. 1 was allotted the work of constructing additional classrooms at Julabditola Primary School, Malda, after completion of all formalities. As noted earlier, Petitioner No. 1 carried out the construction work in accordance with the terms and conditions of the work order and within the stipulated time. Funds had been allotted to the concerned school for the said construction work.

¶14

However, the Headmaster, who holds a position of social respect, allegedly misappropriated the funds, and as a result, the amount payable to the petitioner could not be disbursed. This incident has led to the institution of the present writ petition.

¶15

According to the petitioner, it is entitled to receive a sum of Rs. 5,27,600/- from the School and the respondent authorities.

¶16

Ms. Quraishi, learned Advocate appearing for the

¶17

P a g e | 2

¶18

State, has produced certain documents and submits that a direction may be given to the District Education Officer, Samagra Shiksha Mission, Malda, to release the amount. Upon instructions, she further submits that the amount will be paid within a period of two months from date. The documents produced by Ms. Quraishi are taken on record.

¶19

In view of the submission made on behalf of the State, and upon perusal of the materials on record and consideration of the submissions advanced by the respective parties, I direct respondent no. 3 to disburse the amount of Rs. 5,27,600/- to the petitioner positively within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶20

With these observations and order, WPA 10363 of

¶21

2022 is disposed of . No order as to costs.

¶22

(PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE, J.)

M/S Rojina Construction and Another v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Rojina Construction and Another v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Udit Kumar Dash Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

M/S. Ad Ideas Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mukul Mahanta Vs Union of India and Ors.

Manatosh Paul Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Narayan Chandra Ghosh Vs Food Corporation of India and Ors.

Rajendra Prasad Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.