Allowed

Balwant Singh Bahia v. State of Punjab & Others

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Aug 2009CWP/11716/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge obrated a writ petition seeking release of admitted payment due for executed work. The Court held that paucity of funds is not a valid ground to detain an admitted payment and directed its release within three months with a stipulation of 8% interest for delay.

What did the court decide?

Directions to release admitted payment within three months with 8% interest payable if delayed.

Balwant Singh Bahia Vs State of Punjab… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

¶2

CHANDIGARH

¶3

Civil Writ Petition No.11716 of 2009 Date of Decision: 06.08.2009

¶4

Balwant Singh Bahia

¶5

Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Punjab and others

¶8

Respondents

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH

¶10

Present: Mr.P.S.Rana, Advocate for the petitioner

¶11

Jasbir Singh, J.(Oral)

¶12

Notice of motion.

¶13

On asking of the Court, Mr.A.K.Sharma, Additional Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice.

¶14

Heard.

¶15

By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed that directions be issued to the respondents, to release admitted payment, due to him towards execution of work, allotted vide Work order No.007 dated 12.2.2009.

¶16

It is case of the petitioner that it has successfully executed the work, as mentioned above. Entries were made in the measurement book and amount due to him was approved by the authorities, however, the Treasury Officer has not released the payment on account of paucity of the funds.

¶17

¶18

Civil Writ Petition No.11716 of 2009

¶19

This Court feels that if there is no defect in the work executed by the petitioner, the authorities are not justified to detain amount due to him. Paucity of funds is no ground to deny the admitted payment.

¶20

In view of facts mentioned above, this writ petition is disposed of by issuing directions to the respondents to release admitted payment to the petitioner, if there is no legal hitch, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, the petitioner shall be entitled to get interest @ 8% per annum from the date the amount had become due to him till its realisation. To the contrary, if respondents wish to reject claim of the petitioner, on valid grounds, a speaking order be passed and a

¶21

copy thereof be supplied to the petitioner.

¶22

Mr.A.K.Sharma, Additional Advocate General, Punjab assures that the requisite payment shall be made to the petitioner, as early as possible.

¶23

Copy of the order be supplied to the State counsel under signatures of the Court Reader for compliance.

¶24

06.08.2009 (Jasbir Singh) gk Judge

Balwant Singh Bahia v. State of Punjab & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwant Singh Bahia v. State of Punjab & Others

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

Khem Chand and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Jasvir Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Raju Mishra Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Suresh Dutt Kaushik and Ors. Vs HUDA and Anr.

M/S J.S.Kundlas Rice Mills and Ors. Vs Specified Authority and Ors.

Deepak Bhasin Vs Ut of Chandigarh & Ors.