High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 08 JH CK 3803

M/s Pritha Construction Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs The State Of Jharkhand & Ors.

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 17 August 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ananda Sen, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
W.P.(C) No.6404 of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 662 words

By filing this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:-

"for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/rule/direction commanding the Respondent Authorities to make the payment of admitted due amount of Rs.20,49,229/- due with the Department out of Rs.31,98,265/- per year in view of LOA/work order related to the RFP of selection of agency for land escaping, gardening and maintenance of campus of Dr. Ram Dayal Munda Kala Bhawan, State Museum, Hotwar Ranchi and Audrey House, Ranchi by letter No.862 dated 22.01.2019 and letter no.901 & 902 dated 31.01.2019 issued by the Director, Culture (Respondent No.5) but the same has not been paid to the Petitioner even after an order passed in W.P.(C) No.61/2020 dated 03.02.2020 directing the respondents Director, Culture to separately dealt with in accordance with provisions of the RFP/other relevant government order(s) and on assessment of the work executed by Petitioner No.1 (Annexure-8) and in compliance thereof several dates the meeting has been convened but still no positive order has been passed for making payment of admitted due amount of Rs.20,49,229 out of Rs.31,89,265/- by the Director (Respondent No.5) and also the amount payable to the petitioner after determination of his claims since February, 2019 which may be directed to be determined and paid by this Hon’ble Court but the Respondent Director has no respect even against the order passed by this Hon’ble Court and the entire dues of the petitioner is lying with the Department including an admitted amount of Rs.20,49,229/- out of Rs.31,89,265/- per year as directed by the Letter No.862 dated 22.01.2019 and letter no.901 & 902 dated 31.01.2019 (Annexure-3, 4 & 5).”

2.

Heard learned counsel representing the petitioners and learned counsel representing the respondents.

3.

It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners have completed the work of landscaping, gardening and maintenance of Campus of Dr. Ram Dayal Munda Kala Bhawan, State Museum, Hotwar, Ranchi & Audrey House, Ranchi, which was entrusted to them by the respondents, but the amount for the said work has not been paid to the petitioners.

4.

Learned counsel representing the petitioners submits that the respondents are not taking any step to disburse the admitted amount of the petitioners.

5.

Learned counsel representing the respondent – State, by referring to the counter affidavit submits that on the earlier occasion also, the petitioners had approached this Court by filing a writ petition being W.P.(C) No.61 of 2020, which was disposed vide order dated 03.02.2020, with a direction upon the respondents to take a decision, pursuant to which a reasoned order as contained in Memo No.639 dated 24.02.2020 (Annexure-C to the counter affidavit), giving detailed reasons had been communicated to the petitioners. Learned counsel also submits that the amounts which the petitioners are entitled to get, have already been disbursed to them. He refers to page No.32 of the counter affidavit, which is a letter dated 18.11.2021, wherein it had been mentioned that an amount of Rs.8,02,250/- has been disbursed and no further amount is due to be paid for the aforesaid work. He further refers to page Nos.33 and 34, which are Letters dated 29.09.2021, wherein it had been mentioned that the amount of Rs.1,65,935/- and Rs.1,71,851/- have been disbursed and no further amount is due to be paid, for the aforesaid work.

6.

Considering the aforesaid materials on record, I am of the opinion that the dues are not admitted, rather disputed. The respondents claim that the amounts which as per them are admitted, have already been paid to the petitioners and nothing remains to be paid.

7.

In view of the disputed questions, this writ petition which has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for recovery of money, cannot be adjudicated. If any amount is due to the petitioners, it will be open to the petitioners to approach the Civil Court.

8.

With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands disposed of.