Maa Vaishnavi Technocrate Pvt. Ltd. through Its Proprietor Ravi Kumar Dwivedi Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary Deptt of Personnel Admn Reforms and Rajbhasha

2025:JHHC:14979

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 579 of 2023

Maa Vaishnavi Technocrate Pvt. Ltd., Shashi Bhawan Rani Bagan, Bariyatu, Ranchi-834009 through its proprietor namely Ravi Kumar Dwivedi, R/o Newalkapuri Divdih, Doranda P.O. & P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi (Jharkhand)-834002.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department, having its office at Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.-Jagarnathpur, DistrictRanchi (Jharkhand).

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Department of Water Resources, State of Jharkhand having its office at 1^st Floor, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa & P.S.-Jaganathpur, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand) 834004.

¶8

The Superintending Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Ranchi, having office at Room no. 302, 3^rd floor, Engineering Block, Katchery Chowk P.O. GPO, Ranchi, P.S.-Kotwali, Dist.-Ranchi, State-Jharkhand-834001

¶9

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Ranchi having office at Room no. 302 3^rd floor, Engineering Block, Katchery Chowk P.O. GPO, Ranchi, P.S.-Kotwali, Dist.-Ranchi, State-Jharkhand-834001

¶10

… …. Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶12

For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Kr. Mishra, Advocate Mr. Anshuman Mishra, Advocate For the Respondents-State : Mr. Ravi Prakash Mishra, AC to AAG-II ------ Order No. 06 / Dated : 09.06.2025.

¶13

The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for direction upon the respondents for payment of admitted dues of work completed by the petitioner under the Scheme of Renovation of Senegarha Medium Irrigation.

¶14

Petitioner was awarded contract for repairing and renovation of Senegarha Medium Irrigation Scheme under Block Chanho for a value of Rs.88,94,568.91/- by Agreement No. 26/2017-18.

¶15

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the work was completed and yet the payment as per the agreement has not been made. Completion of work is evident from the letter No. 1306 dated 22.10.2019 issued by the Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Ranchi addressed to the petitioner, stating that the work awarded had been

¶16

2025:JHHC:14979

¶17

completed, but due to subsequent rain and ensuing damage, the payment cannot be made.

¶18

It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner cannot be saddled with liability of repair post-completion of assigned work which was caused by rain.

¶19

Learned counsel refers to Annexure-L enclosed with the counter affidavit in which the measurement book has been annexed showing that the work had been completed.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State submits that an amount of Rs. 63,99,065/-, constituting 71.94% of the total agreement value, has already been disbursed. The balance amount has been withheld due to non-completion of a portion of the work. It is further submitted that completion certificate has not been issued, as only 77% of the contractual work was completed. Repeated reminders were issued to the petitioner for completion of the remaining 33% of the work.

¶21

Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of both sides, letter dated 22.10.2019 of the Executive Engineer lends credence to the plea of the petitioner that the work had been completed and the damage occurred due to subsequent rain.

¶22

This is an admission on the part of the competent authority of the State regarding completion of work and there is merit in the argument on behalf of the petitioner that it cannot be saddled with further liability to complete the repair caused by the damage after the rain.

¶23

Admitted contractual due therefore cannot be denied. The respondent no. 4- The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Ranchi is directed to release the final payment for the work already completed by the petitioner in Reference to Agreement No. 26/2017-18.

¶24

Writ petition is allowed. I.A., if any, is disposed of.

¶25

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶26

Pawan / -

Maa Vaishnavi Technocrate Pvt. Ltd. through Its Proprietor Ravi Kumar Dwivedi v. the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary Deptt of Personnel Admn Reforms and Rajbhasha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maa Vaishnavi Technocrate Pvt. Ltd. through Its Proprietor Ravi Kumar Dwivedi v. the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary Deptt of Personnel Admn Reforms and Rajbhasha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gaurav Kumar Jhunjhunwala And or Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Shashikant Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Madan Mohan Roy Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Revenue Registration and Land Reforms Deptt

M/S Trf Limited through Its Head Legal Counsel Shrehan Siddhartha Vs M/S Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited through Its Chairman Cum Chief Managing Director

Anikant Pyarelal Odhar Vs State of Jharkhand

Diya Seva Sansthan through Secretary Sita Swansi Vs the State of Jharkhand