HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition C No.6202 of 2010 Present: Shri R.S. Baghel, counsel for the petitioner. Division Bench: Hon’ble Shri Dhir'endra Mishra 8n Hon’ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar, JJ. ORDER (Passed on 27th October, 2010) Thefollowing order ofthe Court was passed by Dhirendra Mishra, J. The petitioner has filed this petition and prayed for direction to the respondents to pay the petitioner a sum of Rs.4,33,700/— which he is entitled towards the bill raised by him vide Annexure—P/6. . Grievance of the petitioner is that the Executive Engineer, Municipal Corporation, Durg, issued work order for sculpting and mural art within the territorial limits of respondent No.2. The period allowed for executing the above work was one year. The petitioner completed the work of sculpting and creating murals at Gaurav Path, Padamnabhpur, etc. to the satisfaction of the respondents, however, the respondents stopped issuing the work order to the petitioner and they iSsued fresh tender notice for the same work (Annexure—P/3). The petitioner served legal notice to the respondents (Arfnexure-P/4 & P/S), however, the same was never replied and finally, the petitioner raised bill of . PETITIONER: 'Randhawa Prasad, S/o late Shri Satyanarain, aged about 3O years, R/o Quarter No. M-429, Ompur, Rajgamar, Korba (CG) Versus RESPONDENTS: 1. Municipal Corporation of Durg, through its Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Building, Durg, District Durg (CG) 2. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Durg, Municipal Corporation Building, Durg (CG) Annexure—P/6 for Rs.4,33,700/- towards the work executed by him, however, despite receipt of the notice, the bill has not been settled. .Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in these circumstances, an appropriate direction may be issued to the respondents to settle his bill of Annexure—P/6. The relief claimed by the petitioner in the instant petition cannot be granted in a writ proceeding as the same would involve disputed questions of fact which would require recording of evidence and the nature of dispute cannot be decided in a writ proceeding. 5. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed as not maintainable. Sd/— Sd/— Dhirendra Mishra t l RANGANATH CHANDRAKAR Judge Judge .