IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 9997 of 2007 M/s Ghan Shyam Lal, Simrahi Bazar, Supaul through its partner Pawan Kumar Sharma, son of late Durga Prasad Sharma, resident of Raghopur, P S - Raghopur, Dist - Supaul - Petitioner Versus 1 The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary 2 The Secretary, Path Nirman Vibhag, Bihar, Patna 3 The Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner-cum-Special Secretary, Path Nirman Vibhag, Bihar, Patna 4 The Special Officer (Communication) Path Nirman Vibhag, Bihar, Patna 5 The Chief Engineer, N H Wing, Bihar, Patna 6 The superintending Engineer, N H Circle, Purnea 7 The Executive Engineer, N H Division, Purnea 8 The Assistant Engineer, N H Sub Division, Kursela 9 The Junior Engineer, N H Section, Purnea - Respondents ----------- 8 26.11.2008 The petitioner had filed this writ application for a direction to the respondent-State in the National Highway Division to make allocation of funds for payment of his bills for work done and admitted by the respondents. As would appear from various communications appended to the writ application including Annexure- 6, there was no dispute with regard to quantum of payment due to the petitioner but the payments were not being made because of lack of adequate fund allocation. Annexure-6 is communication of the Superintending Engineer to the Chief Engineer and clearly notes the said fact and is dated 23.05.2006. Even though the whole matter stood admitted and it was grossly arbitrary on part of the State to withhold payment of substantial amount of money for such a long time, during pendency of the writ application, the matter was examined by a Liability Committee constituted by the State. One wonders what was the reason for reexamination of the matter once, by official communications; the liability had already been admitted. - 2 - However, the Liability Committee took a very curious stand. It did not dispute the work done, it did not dispute the quantum of payment due to the petitioner, it did not dispute that the payments were not made because of lack of allocation of funds but it hit upon an ingenious idea to deny payments. It noted that the measurement book, which is an internal Government document, was verified and signed by the Junior Engineer but not so signed by the Executive or the Superintending Engineer and because of this default on part of their own officers, the liability was repudiated. This led to a detailed order by this Court in these proceedings being order dated 24.07.2008 wherein this Court specifically held that for default of its own officers, a contractor cannot be denied his dues if dues are otherwise admitted. Before such a denial can be made, to establish their bona fide, the Department must proceed against the erring officers. They cannot be heard to say that their officers erred because of which the petitioner must suffer and the officers enjoy their position and their remuneration to the prejudice of the petitioner. Holding thus, the order of the Liability Committee was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration. Now good sense has prevailed or probably adequate funds are now available. Liability Committee, on reappraisal of the matter, has accepted the State’s liability in full and as per supplementary counter affidavit filed today, the Liability Committee has recommended payment of Rs 10,35,482/- to the petitioner. This Court can only note that to the observations of this - 3 - Court about action being taken against the erring officers, it is reported by the Liability Committee that action has been recommended against the Junior Engineer for not producing the measurement book in time and disciplinary proceedings have been recommended against him. Liability Committee did not examine that if measurement book was not produced before the Executive Engineer in time or any authority in time then how was the Executive Engineer writing to the Superintending Engineer for funds of petitioner’s bill and the Superintending Engineer writing to the Chief Engineer in same regard. It is apparent that a Junior Officer is being made escape goat. Be that as it may, as the liability has been admitted by the State through its Liability Committee, I direct that within fifteen days from today, adequate fund allocation should be made for payment of petitioner’s bill, as aforesaid and payment made within one month from today. In case payment is not made within one month from today, the same shall be payable alongwith interest of 12% from the time it was due. This writ application is, accordingly, allowed. Let a copy of this order be given to the learned counsel for the State. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)