Allowed

Dinesh Kumar Rai v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC14 Nov 2024CWJC/9182/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226, the High Court of Patna allowed the plea of a contractor who executed a canal cleaning project for the Department of Panchayati Raj. The court directed the respondents to pay the pending amount of Rs. 12,78,108/- within six weeks, holding that payment must be made immediately upon completion of work even if ancillary documents like Aadhar details were outst

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondents to pay the due amount of Rs. 12,78,108/- to the petitioner within six weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

Dinesh Kumar Rai Vs The State of Bihar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9182 of 2024

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Dinesh Kumar Rai S/o Mishri Roy, R/o ward no 12 Rampur, Bharaiya, Nirpur, Samastipur, Bihar.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar service, through the Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Govt of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The District Magistrate, Samastipur, Bihar

¶8

The District Development Commissioner, Samastipur

¶9

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Rosera Sub-division, District- Samastipur.

¶10

The Block Development Officer Bithan Block, Dist- Samastipur.

¶11

The Pramukh Panchayat Samiti, Bithan Block, Samastipur, Bihar.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhat Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunil Kumar Mandal, SC 3 Mr. Arjun, AC to SC 3 ======================================================

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY ORAL ORDER

¶15

4 14-11-2024

¶16

Present writ petition has been filed for the following

¶17

reliefs :

¶18

“I. To issue writ in the nature of mandamus or direction commanding the respondents and/or their agents to disburse the amount in favour of the petitioner for his cleaning work of canal

¶19

II. To issue writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents and/or their agents specifically the Block Development Officer, and the pramukh of Bithan Block to consider the representation of the petitioner and disburse the amount in favour of the petitioner for his cleaning

¶20

Patna High Court CWJC No.9182 of 2024(4) dt.14-11-2024 2/5

¶21

work of canal after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a specified period fixing by this Hon'ble Court.

¶22

III. To issue writ calling upon the respondents to produce and/or transmit all the relevant record before this Hon'ble Court so that conscionable justice may be given.

¶23

IV. To direct the respondent to make payment of the rest entire amount of Rs. 12,78,108/- as per bill provided by the Petitioner with interest forthwith.

¶24

V. To declare the action of the Respondents in not releasing the bill amount of Rs. 12,78,108/for the work executed by the petitioner for the construction of new block as illegal, arbitrary, malafide, unjust, irresponsible and contrary to the principles of natural justice

¶25

VI. To grant compensation in favour of the petitioner for the losses suffered by him VII. To grant any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is found entitled under the facts and circumstances of the instant writ petition”.

¶26

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner, pursuant to the formal work order no. 03/2021-2022, issued by the Block Development Officer respondent no. 5, has executed agreement for the contract value of Rs. 12, 78, 108/-. The

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.9182 of 2024(4) dt.14-11-2024 3/5

¶28

petitioner is a Panchayat Secretary and was allotted with the cleaning work of canal near by Marthua Digrachaur to land of Lal Babu. The petitioner has completed the work and submitted the requisite bills and the authorities have thereafter inspected the work done by the petitioner.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that though the petitioner has made several visits to the office of the concerned officer for the due amounts of the petitioner but the same has not been paid till date. Hence the present writ petition.

¶30

In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents the allotment of the work and completion has not been denied. However, it is stated that as per the guidelines issued by the authority, the petitioner is required to furnish the Aadhar Card, Bank passbook of the labourers who have worked in the project and the petitioner was directed to submit the same vide letter no. 464 dated 03.08.2024 and letter no. 488 dated 16.08.2024 but the same have not been furnished. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that the payments will be transferred to the accounts of the related labours.

¶31

Opposing the statements of the counter affidavit filed

¶32

Patna High Court CWJC No.9182 of 2024(4) dt.14-11-2024 4/5

¶33

by the respondents, the learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the labourers who have worked at that relevant point of time have already been paid by the petitioner from his own source and no one can expect that a daily wage labourers can wait for their payment after lapse of three years from the date of completion of work. Learned counsel has further stated that once the petitioner has participated in the tender and he was a successful bidder for the work which were allotted to him, the question of paying the amounts directly to the labourers does not arise and the respondents should pay directly to the petitioner and should not demand Aadhar card and Bank passbook of the labourers. Learned counsel has therefore, prayed to the Court to allow this writ petition.

¶34

The factum of allotment of the work and the completion has not been denied by the authority. Further it is to be say that though the estimated value of the work was Rs. 14, 54,400/- the petitioner has submitted a tender of Rs. 12,78,108/- and the formal work order was issued in his favour and the petitioner has also completed the same within the stipulated time. Once the work has been completed by the petitioner, the authority is expected to make the necessary

¶35

Patna High Court CWJC No.9182 of 2024(4) dt.14-11-2024 5/5

¶36

payment immediately to the contractor. However in this case even after lapse of more than two years the officials are coming up with some excuse or the other. Further it is not the case of the respondents that the laboures have not been paid by the petitioner. Once it is established that the petitioner has paid to the laboures, the authority is expected to make the full payment to the petitioner without insisting for submission of Aadhar number and the Bank passbook of the labours. Once it is established that the petitioner has completed the work, the authority is expected to pay the due amount of the petitioner as per the terms of the contract.

¶37

In the light of the same, the present writ petition is allowed. The authority shall pay the due amount within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in favour of the petitioner immediately.

¶38

With the above direction, the present writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated herein above.

¶39

(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)

¶40

Prakash/-

¶41

Dinesh Kumar Rai v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Kumar Rai v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Achaladev Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Shiv Kumar Chanani Vs The State of Bihar

Shiv Kumar Chanani Vs The State of Bihar

Anavar Hussain @ Md Anwar Hussain Vs The State Of Bihar

M/s Shankar Engineering Works Vs The Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (Biada)

Digvijay Purwe Vs The State of Bihar