Pankaj Kumar Das vs The State Of Bihar & Ors.

Date : 21-08-2026

The petitioner has filed the Writ petition for the following reliefs:

The brief facts culled out of the Writ petition are that the petitioner participated in Tender No. 04/2017-18 issued by the Municipal Council, Sultanganj for construction of Samrat Ashok Bhawan and was declared the successful bidder. Pursuant thereto, a work order and agreement were issued on 07.03.2019. Though the stipulated date of completion was 06.09.2020, extension was granted on account of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the petitioner completed the work in December, 2021, within the extended period.

It is the case of the petitioner that despite completion of the work, the respondents have not released the admitted/claimed dues of approximately Rs.21,90,221/-, i.e., comprising the bill amount of Rs.16,92,221/- and earnest money of Rs.4,98,000/-. The petitioner submitted several representations dated 10.03.2022, 23.09.2022 and 18.11.2022 and also submitted the Running Account Bill, but no payment was made.

The petitioner further states that, upon receipt of a communication regarding water leakage in the building, the defect was rectified within a few days. The petitioner thereafter again requested the authorities to release his pending dues, but no effective action was taken.

The petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit bringing on record the subsequent developments and additional facts. It is stated therein that the final bill amount of Rs.15,20,712/- was paid to the petitioner on 26.08.2023. However, the earnest money of Rs.4,98,000/- and the security deposit of approximately Rs.4,50,000/- was deducted from the petitioner's bills. Thus, according to the petitioner, a total amount of approximately Rs.9,48,000/-, besides interest and litigation costs, remains payable.

The petitioner further states that he approached the authorities by representation dated 01.07.2024, besides his earlier representations dated 23.09.2022, 18.11.2022 and 19.04.2023, but the aforesaid amounts have still not been released.

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite completion of the contractual work and repeated representations, the respondents have withheld the petitioner's legitimate dues without assigning any valid reason. Such inaction is arbitrary and has seriously affected the petitioner's ability to undertake further contractual work. It is therefore submitted that the respondents may be directed to consider and release the petitioner's outstanding dues, along with appropriate consequential relief, in accordance with law.

A counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3 and 4. The Learned counsel for the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 submits that although the petitioner completed the work in December, 2021 and submitted his bill on 07.02.2022, payment was withheld on account of complaints regarding water leakage from the roof of Samrat Ashok Bhawan. The petitioner was directed to rectify the defect, but, according to the respondents, the leakage was not removed despite repeated directions, as recorded in the communications dated 11.11.2022, 19.11.2022, 13.12.2022 and 17.01.2023.

The Learned counsel for the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 further submits that the petitioner again approached the authorities on 19.04.2023, the admitted amount of Rs.15,20,712/- was released to him vide memo dated 25.08.2023. Thus, there was no deliberate withholding of the petitioner's admitted dues; the payment had only been kept pending due to the alleged deficiency in the work.

It is further submitted by the Learned counsel for the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 that, under Para 28 of the N.I.T., the earnest money of Rs.4,98,000/- is refundable only after 36 months from the date of completion of the work, subject to satisfaction of the competent authority. Accordingly, the respondents contend that, as on date, no amount is due and payable to the petitioner.

The Learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 and 4, submits that the grievance raised in the writ petition has substantially been redressed by payment of the admitted bill amount and that no further relief survives for consideration and prayed to dismiss the Writ petition as it is devoid of merits.

A counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1. The Learned counsel for respondent No. 1 submits that the petitioner was awarded the work of construction of Samrat Ashok Bhawan pursuant to Tender No. 04/2017-18 dated 08.11.2017 and, thereafter, executed the work agreement with the Nagar Parishad, Sultanganj.

The Learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 further submits that upon receipt of Letter No. 943 dated 29.04.2022 from the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Sultanganj seeking allotment of the remaining funds, the Urban Development and Housing Department, Bihar had already sanctioned the requisite fund for payment. The sanctioned amount was required to be deposited in the PL Account of Nagar Parishad, Sultanganj in accordance with the prescribed financial procedure. The same was communicated to the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna vide Memo No. 71 dated 28.07.2022.

It is, therefore, submitted that the respondents had taken necessary steps for sanction and availability of funds and that the matter of release/payment was to be dealt with in accordance with the prescribed procedure by the concerned authorities.

Having considered the rival submissions and the materials on record, this Court finds that the petitioner had completed the work and submitted his bill on 07.02.2022. However, the payment was not released at that stage on account of the complaint regarding water leakage from the roof of Samrat Ashok Bhawan. The respondents issued communications dated 11.11.2022 and 19.11.2022 requiring removal of the leakage, followed by the report dated 13.12.2022 and the subsequent report dated 17.01.2023 recording that the defect had not been satisfactorily removed.

It further appears from the counter affidavit that, after the petitioner approached the authorities and the admitted bill amount of Rs.15,20,712/- was paid to him on 26.08.2023. Thus, the admitted dues towards the final bill have already been paid.

As regards the petitioner's claim for refund of the earnest money of Rs.4,98,000/-, the respondents have specifically relied upon Para 28 of the N.I.T., according to which the amount is refundable after 36 months from the date of completion, subject to satisfaction of the competent authority.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court finds no ground to grant the reliefs sought in the present Writ petition. The admitted bill amount having already been paid and the remaining claims being governed by the terms and conditions of the contract, therefore, the Writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.