IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 10327 of 2006 Ratneshwari Prasad Thakur, son of Janak Thakur, resident of Village - Bhelaipur, P O - Bishunpur Pandey, P S - Kanti, Dist - Muzaffarpur - Petitioner Versus 1 The Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd through the General Manager Telecom, Dist - Muzaffarpur 2 The General Manager Telecom, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, Dist - Muzaffarpur - Respondents ----------- 2 05.12.2008 The petitioner had undertaken and executed certain work for the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited. There is no dispute, in view of the counter affidavit filed, that the work was satisfactorily completed and all payments were made. The only dispute is with regard to refund of earnest money and security money. Petitioner asserts that the contract having been duly performed and all bills settled, there was no legal justification for withholding earnest money and security money. The counter affidavit states that the petitioner was asked to finish clearance from the Employees Provident Fund Commissioner with regard to provident fund liability in respect of labourers engaged by the petitioner. On a query from the Court whether any such thing was provided in the agreement, no agreement was brought on record nor even pleaded in the counter affidavit. In such a situation, this Court has no option but to hold that it is mere pretence of an excuse to deny the legitimate refund to the petitioner and withhold the money without just and legal cause. The contract was for work to be done. Contract was satisfactorily done and full payments made, accounts settled and squared up. Thus, I have no option but to direct that within fifteen days 2 from today, respondents shall refund the earnest money and security money to the petitioner failing which they will be liable to pay interest at the rate of 12% from the time when the accounts were finally settled. With these observations and directions, the writ application stands disposed of. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)