IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.1883 of 2011 Date of Decision : February 01, 2011. M/s Walia Construction Co. .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Kanwaljit Singh, Senior Advocate, with Ms.Sukhwinder Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Monica Chhibbar Sharma, DAG, Punjab. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 to 3 only. Ms.Monica Chhibbar Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on their behalf. Let three copies of the writ petition be handed-over to the learned State counsel during the course of day. In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to issue notice to respondent No.4 or to seek counter reply from respondent Nos.1 to 3 at this stage. The petitioner-Company is an approved Contractor which was allotted the work regarding renewal coat on National Highway No.15 in C.W.P.No .1883 of 2011 2 District Gurdaspur. It is averred that the above-stated work though has been executed by the petitioner-Company to the entire satisfaction of the authorities on 26.3.2009, yet no payment is being made despite the submission of the final bills. It is alleged that on one pretext or the other, the payment has been withheld on the pretext of verifying the quality of the executed work. The petitioner now seeks a direction to respondent No.4-Executive Engineer for making the payment of the final bills. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that since the petitioner-Company is said to have executed the work way back in the year 2009, it is imperative upon the respondents to verify its claim in a time bound manner and complete the inspection of the work expeditiously so that due amount can be released to the petitioner-Company. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the Chief Engineer, P.W.D. (B&R), Patiala, to verify the above mentioned claim of the petitioner and take appropriate steps to ensure that the due payment to which the petitioner-Company is found entitled to, released within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Dasti. February 01, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE