IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7214 of 2005 RAM CHANDRA SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner: Mr. Manish Sahay, Advocate For the Respondents:Mr. Shashidhar Jha, AC to GA-9 3 2.12.2009 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Initially the writ application was filed for a direction upon the respondent authority to pay admitted dues bills of Rs.56,257/- for construction of an approach road for Bridge No. 32/3 of Bihar-Barbigha-Sheikhpura-Shikandara Road. The work was completed by him and the bills raised but the respondent slept over the matter. After the writ application was filed the matter came to be referred to so called liability committee. The said liability committee has came to reject the claim of the petitioner vide order dated 24.9.2005 which has been brought on record as annexure-3 with I.A. No. 3290 of 2009. I.A. No. 3290 of 2009 stands allowed. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that three reasons have been assigned by the liability committee for rejecting the claim of the petitioner. A bare reading of the three reasons would show that the reasons are attributable to the State and the contractor who is the present petitioner cannot be faulted for those three reasons. All the three reasons are the responsibility thrashed upon the State Government or its officials and that cannot be a ground for - 2 - rejection of the claim of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner presses three decisions rendered by the High Court in the cases of Bishwanath Prasad vrs. The State of Bihar & Ors (2007 (1) PLJR 258), Harbanshi Lall vrs. The State of Bihar & Ors (2007(1) PLJR 264) as well as Ram Pravesh Prasad vrs. The State of Bihar & Ors (2007 (1) PLJR 273). The ratio laid down in the three decisions squarely covered the case of the present petitioner. If that be so, the order contained in annexure-3 passed by the liability committee dated 24.9.2005 stands quashed. The stand taken by the respondents in the counter affidavit is of no avail in view of the law which has been laid down by the High Court in this regard. The respondents would be obliged to make payment to the petitioner in terms of the agreed amount preferably within three months from the date of communication or production of a copy of this order. This writ application stands allowed. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)