AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Petitioner is a contractor who was awarded three contracts:-
A. Patch Repair Work in Km. 105.00 to 108.600 on NH 87 Ext. (New NH-109) under deposit 2023-24 in the state of Uttarakhand which was completed on 29-06-2024 and the same was measured by the department on 03-07-2024, total bill sanctioned of the said work is Rs. 2,46,671/-
B. Re-construction of R/Wall at Km. 107 (0-2) & 113 (4-6), Edge Wall at Km 111 & 112 and catch pit on NH-87 Ext (New NH-109) in the state of Uttarakhand, which was completed on 15-09-2024 and the same was measured by the department on 15-09-2024, total bill sanctioned of the said work is Rs.4,95,740/-
C. Construction of C.C. Drain at Km. 111.00 to 113.00 on NH-87 Ext (New NH-109) in the state of Uttarakhand, which was completed on 24-02-2024 and the same measured by the department on 24-02-2024, total bill sanctioned of the said work is Rs.4,90,502/-
The petitioner completed the aforesaid work way back in the year 2024 on different dates and for that work he was never paid a single penny.
According to learned counsel for the petitioner for the aforesaid three works an amount of ₹12,32,914/- is pending with the respondent-Department since 2024.
The petitioner made an averment in the writ petition that dues payable to him is admitted by the respondent-Department and the Department be directed to make payment to the petitioner.
This Court vide order dated 14.10.2026 directed the State counsel to get instructions in the matter that as to whether dues are admitted or not.
Today, learned State counsel passed on instructions to this Court dated 22.10.2026, which are taken on record and on the basis of said instructions submitted that dues are admitted and the petitioner has to be paid an amount of ₹12,32,914/- but due to non-availability of funds the said payment could not be made so far.
It is also mentioned in the instructions that as and when the budget would be available the amount due to the petitioner shall be disbursed to him.
Having considered the rival submission of the parties and having gone through the instructions very carefully, this Court is of the view that once the respondent-Department sees that dues are admitted and the petitioner is entitled to get the same from the respondent-Department. Withholding of the dues would create unnecessary loss to the petitioner, who is a petty contractor.
In such view of the matter, writ petition stands allowed. Respondent no.4 is directed to make payment of the admitted dues of ₹12,32,914/- to the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.