Disposed

M/S Chauhan Construction Damta Barkot Uttarkashi v. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Public Work Department N.H. Division

Uttarakhand HC1 Mar 2024WPMS/88/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged delayed payment of construction bills. The court held that payment depends on fund allocation by the State Government. It directed the respondent to ensure fund allocation at the earliest to settle dues.

What did the court decide?

Direction to ensure allocation of funds at the earliest. Payment of outstanding dues to be made as and when funds are released.

Sl. No	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
			WPMS No. 87 of 2023 with WPMS No. 88 of 2023 Hon’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J. Mr. Pramod Bailwal, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Since common questions of law and fact are involved in these writ petitions, therefore they are being heard together and are being decided by a common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity, facts of Writ Petition (M/ S) No. 87 of 2023 alone are being considered and discussed. 4. Petitioner is a partnership firm, which is engaged in Civil Construction work and is registered as Class-A contractor with State Public Works Department. According to petitioner, contract for construction of protection work in ’Km. 71 (4-6), (6-8) on NH-123 (507) under FDR 201819’ was granted to him by the Executive Engineer, National Highway Division, Public Works Department Barkot, District Uttarkashi, and he completed the said work to the satisfaction of the concerned authorities, however, full payment has not been released to him so far. The relief claimed by petitioner in this writ petition is as follows: - “i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents authorities to make the due payment of Rs. 4,90,819.95/ - to the petitioner along with the interest for the work which has already been completed.”

Sl.
No

Date

Office Notes, reports,
orders or
proceedings or
directions and
Registrar’s order with
Signatures

COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS

WPMS No. 87 of 2023
with
WPMS No. 88 of 2023
Hon’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.
Mr. Pramod Bailwal, Advocate for the
petitioner.
2.
Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for
the State of Uttarakhand.
3.
Since common questions of law and fact
are involved in these writ petitions, therefore
they are being heard together and are being
decided by a common judgment. However,
for the sake of brevity, facts of Writ Petition
(M/ S) No. 87 of 2023 alone are being
considered and discussed.
4.
Petitioner is a partnership firm, which is
engaged in Civil Construction work and is
registered as Class-A contractor with State
Public
Works
Department.
According
to
petitioner,
contract
for
construction
of
protection work in ’Km. 71 (4-6), (6-8) on
NH-123
(507)
under
FDR
201819’
was
granted to him by the Executive Engineer,
National Highway Division,
Public Works
Department Barkot, District Uttarkashi, and
he
completed
the
said
work
to
the
satisfaction of the concerned authorities,
however, full payment has not been released
to him so far. The relief claimed by petitioner
in this writ petition is as follows: -
“i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the
nature
of
mandamus
directing
the
respondents authorities to make the due
payment
of
Rs.
4,90,819.95/ -
to
the
petitioner along with the interest for the
work which has already been completed.”

5. A counter affidavit has been filed by
Rajendra Kumar, Assistant Engineer, NH Division, Public Works Department, Barkot, District Uttarkashi. Para 6 of the said counter affidavit is extracted below: - “6. That the contents of paragraph nos. 6 to 16 of the writ petition are admitted to the extent of matters of record. Rest of the averments are not admitted and in reply it is submitted that in the year 2018-19, under the F.D.R. Fund, against the total calculated cost of work amounting Rs. 1035.88 lakhs, only an amount of Rs. 25.01 lakhs was sanctioned and allocated. Under the aforesaid sanctioned fund, the contract in question was not included. In the year 2018-19, against the work executed under the F.D.R. Fund, the remaining sanction amount of Rs. 151.30 lakhs has yet not been received.
It is submitted that in this regard, from Division Level vide Letter No. 978 dated
07.09.2019, Letter No. 1271 dated
24.09.2021, Letter No. 1327 dated
12.10.2021, Letter No. 558 dated
21.05.2022 and Letter No. 1351 dated 23.09.2022, after calculating amount of pending bills against the work executed under F.D.R. Fund, a Demand of Rs.
362.77 Lakh has been forwarded for sanction of funds. The sanction of funds in regard to the aforesaid work has to be
granted at the level of the Ministry of Road Transport and National Highway, Govt. of Uttarakhand, new Delhi and Government of Uttarakhand. Ture/ correct typed version/ copy of the Letter No. 978
dated 07.09.2019, Letter No. 1271 dated
24.09.2021, Letter No. 1327 dated
12.10.2021, Letter No. 558 dated
21.05.2022 and Letter No. 1351 dated
23.09.2022 are collectively being
annexed as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit.

5.
A counter affidavit has been filed by

Rajendra Kumar, Assistant Engineer, NH
Division, Public Works Department, Barkot,
District Uttarkashi. Para 6 of the said counter
affidavit is extracted below: -
“6. That the contents of paragraph nos. 6
to 16 of the writ petition are admitted to
the extent of matters of record. Rest of
the averments are not admitted and in
reply it is submitted that in the year
2018-19, under the F.D.R. Fund, against
the
total
calculated
cost
of
work
amounting Rs. 1035.88 lakhs, only an
amount of Rs. 25.01 lakhs was sanctioned
and
allocated.
Under
the
aforesaid
sanctioned fund, the contract in question
was not included. In the year 2018-19,
against the work executed under the
F.D.R.
Fund,
the
remaining
sanction
amount of Rs. 151.30 lakhs has yet not
been received.

It is submitted that in this regard, from
Division Level vide Letter No. 978 dated

07.09.2019,
Letter
No.
1271
dated

24.09.2021,
Letter
No.
1327
dated

12.10.2021,
Letter
No.
558
dated

21.05.2022 and Letter No. 1351 dated
23.09.2022, after calculating amount of
pending bills against the work executed
under F.D.R. Fund, a Demand of Rs.

362.77 Lakh has been forwarded for
sanction of funds. The sanction of funds
in regard to the aforesaid work has to be

granted at the level of the Ministry of
Road Transport and National Highway,
Govt. of Uttarakhand, new Delhi and
Government of Uttarakhand. Ture/ correct
typed version/ copy of the Letter No. 978

dated 07.09.2019, Letter No. 1271 dated

24.09.2021,
Letter
No.
1327
dated

12.10.2021,
Letter
No.
558
dated

21.05.2022 and Letter No. 1351 dated

23.09.2022
are
collectively
being

annexed as Annexure No. 3 to this
affidavit.

Therefore, as the when the sanction of
funds is received as per aforesaid in respect of pending bills of the petitioner, the further process for payment of amount as per Contract Agreement/ Bond will be proceeded.”
6. The respondents have contended that
since necessary funds have not been released so far, therefore, payment could not
be made to petitioner, and final payment shall be made only upon receiving funds from the Central Government. 7. In such view of the matter, the writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 2 to take necessary steps to ensure that allocation of funds is made at the earliest. As and when the funds are released, payment of the outstanding dues to petitioner shall be made, without further delay. ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.) 01.03.2024 Navin

Therefore, as the when the sanction of

funds is received as per aforesaid in
respect of pending bills of the petitioner,
the
further
process
for
payment
of
amount as per Contract Agreement/ Bond
will be proceeded.”

6.
The respondents have contended that

since
necessary
funds
have
not
been
released so far, therefore, payment could not

be made to petitioner, and final payment
shall be made only upon receiving funds from
the Central Government.
7.
In such view of the matter, the writ
petitions are disposed of with a direction to
the respondent no. 2 to take necessary steps
to ensure that allocation of funds is made at
the earliest. As and when the funds are
released, payment of the outstanding dues to
petitioner shall be made, without further
delay.
( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.)
01.03.2024
Navin

M/S Chauhan Construction Damta Barkot Uttarkashi v. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Public Work Department N.H. Division

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Chauhan Construction Damta Barkot Uttarkashi v. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Public Work Department N.H. Division

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

Sagar Stone Crusher Ranihaat Chauras Vs State of Uttarakhand

Lalit Singh Bathiyal Contractor Vs Commissioner, State Goods and Service Tax Commissionerate

Rishipal Singh Vs National Highway Authority of India

M/S Chauhan Construction Damta Barkot Uttarkashi Vs State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Public Work Department N.H. Division

Sukhpal Singh Vs Commissioner Garhwal Mandal Garwal Dehradun

Akram Ali Vs Tehsildar Kashipur Udham Singh Nagar