M/S. Satya Sai Construction, Jajpur Vs State of Odisha

The petitioner, being a superclass contractor, was entrusted for construction of a bridge in the district of Jajpur for an aggregate value of Rs.574.25 lakhs. Though the substantial constructions have been undertaken by the petitioner, but because of the non-acquisition of the land and some of the persons approached the Civil Court, wherein the order of status quo has been passed, further progress could not be made there. In fact, the entire work remained in suspended animation since 2019.

¶17

Because of such impasse having created, it was perceived that the construction should not remain in abeyance eternally and the approach was made for closure of the work. It was found by the authorities that the bridge project comes across the revised route of the National waterway No.5 and a report

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

was submitted by S.E.R.W. Division, Jajpur. The petitioner has completed the work value at Rs.125.71 lakhs. Because of such impediments having created, it was decided to close the project of construction of a H.L Bridge over Chingudia Nallah at 6 km on Bari Binjharpur Road in the district of Jajpur and the same was duly communicated to the petitioner. The letter dated 22.01.2025 annexed to the instant writ petition reveals that a consensus of closure of such proposal was arrived at between the parties and the petitioner has agreed that he would not claim any compensation for the left out work. Despite having aggrieved and a clear admission having made that the petitioner has undertaken construction worth Rs.125.71 lakhs, no payment has been released as of now.

¶20

The petitioner has approached this Court for a writ of mandamus upon the authorities to release the payment for the work admitted in the letter dated 22.01.2025, together with interest, as the said amount has been unreasonably withheld by the said authorities. The sequel of the events narrated in the instant writ petition shows that there is no quarrel on factual matrix that the petitioner has admittedly worked worth Rs.125.71 lakhs and alleged to have not been paid by the authorities. Once the authorities have decided to close the project and admitted by quantifying the work, it is improbable and inconceivable that it would withhold the money which is legally due to the petitioner without any reasonable justification.

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

We, therefore, direct the appropriate authority to release the sum of Rs.125.71 lakhs after adjusting any amount paid to the petitioner, if there be, together with an interest @6% from the month of January, 2025 till six weeks from the date of the order. In the event the said amount is paid within the time stipulated hereinabove, no further claim of the petitioner shall be entertained; however in default, the appropriate authority shall pay the interest over and above the amount due to the petitioner at the prime lending rate of the Reserve Bank of India until the date of actual payment.

¶23

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶24

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

(M.S. Raman)

Judge

Aswini

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ASWINI KUMAR SETHY Designation: Personal Assistant (Secretary-in-Charge) Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 05-Aug-2025 17:54:49

¶29

Page 3 of 3

M/S. Satya Sai Construction, Jajpur v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Satya Sai Construction, Jajpur v. State of Odisha

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

State of Odisha Vs Satyashri Mohapatra

M/S. Transtech Solution, Bbsr Vs Commissioner Ct and Gst, Odisha

Antarjyami Mohapatra Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes (Cbdt), New Delhi

Harihar Lenka Vs State of Odisha

Meerarani Rana Vs State of Odisha

M/S D.K. Engineering and Construction, Bolangir Vs State of Odisha