IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7451 of 2009 ASHISH PANDEY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 06.07.2009 The petitioner prays for direction to respondents for payment of the security amount as well as amount of National Savings Certificate (NSC) along with the admitted dues payable to him in connection with the construction of road and Nala of Kamala Nagar Colony, Bhagalpur which was completed way back in September, 2008 pursuant to a contract on 13.09.2007. The petitioner submits that as the map of the work differed from the actual work, a supplementary agreement (Annexure-3) was also entered between the respective sides. Learned counsel submits that after completing the work, he made various representations to the authorities to make the payment. The District Magistrate also vide his letter dated 12.02.2009 enquired from Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Bhagalpur. The Assistant Engineer on 1.4.2009 intimated the Executive Engineer that a sum of Rs. 48,88,445/- is due. A copy of the aforesaid letter is annexed as Annexure – 6. The Executive Engineer Minor Irrigation instead of making payment intimated Executive Engineer (Technical Cell) Headquarters vide his letter dated 29.05.2009 regarding memorandum given by the petitioner for payment. Learned counsel submits that presently payment has been withheld on the ground that the Vigilance Department would verify the works done by the petitioner. The petitioner made a representation on 8.6.2009 to the - 2 - Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Bhagalpur stating that vide letter no. 359 dated 3.6.2009 Vigilance Department has not put any stay on the payment. Learned Counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has not enclosed letter no. 359 dated 3.06.2009 of vigilance. Mrs. Nilu Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent further submits that the District Magistrate, in fact, has sought information from the Executive Engineer regarding specific opinion from the enquiry made by the technical cell, Vigilance. After hearing the counsel for the parties this Court is of the view that the respondents should verify the work done by the petitioner within two months, if not already done and after verifying the work would pay the admitted dues to the petitioner and would also return the earnest money and NSC. Kundan (S. P. Singh, J.)