IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16807 of 2011 Kems Services Private Limited, through its Managing Director Mr. Mohan Kumar Khandelwal, son of Sri Durga Prasad Khandelwal, 76, B1/B Maurya Lok Complex, Dak Bunglow Road, P.S. Kotwali, Patna-800001 (Bihar). … Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 2. The Engineer-in-Chief (North), Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 3. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Bhagalpur 4. The Superintending Engineer, Water Resources Department, Sinchai Anchal, Bhagalpur 5. The Executive Engineer, Flood Control Division, Naugachia. District Bhagalpur. ------- For the Petitioner : M/s Raghib Ahsan, Sr. Advocate and Manish Sahay, Advocate For the Respondents : Mrs. Binita Singh, Asstt. Counsel to A.A.G.-I. ------- 02/ 26.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs :- (i) For commanding the concerned respondents to pay admitted bill amount i.e. Rs.1,09,44,266/- (Rupees one crore nine lakh forty four thousand two hundred sixty six) only to the petitioner along with interest @ 18% per annum for belated period, because after admitting total bill amount of 4th on account bill (i.e. Rs.1,74,77,286/-), the respondent no.5 (i.e. the Executive Engineer) had paid only Rs.65,33,000/- due to lack of sufficient fund but rest amount i.e. Rs.1,09,44,266/- is still pending for payment. (ii) For commanding and directing the concerned respondent to pay all admissible amount which relates to final bill as well as entire security deposit amount to the petitioner after closing the agreement along with - 2 - interest @ 18% per annum for belated period, relates to work namely “ Anti Erosion work for Restoration of Damage Spur nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 of Ismailpur-Bind Toli Embankment D/S Vikramshila Setu for the year 2011- 12” belong to Agreement no. 1 SBD of 2011-12, because balance work of the petitioner has been handed over to another agency without closing the agreement in question and clearing the liability of the petitioner. (iii) For further directing the concerned respondent to refund Rs.12,24,990/- (Rupees twelve lacs twenty four thousand nine hundred ninety) only which were deducted from 3rd & 4th running account bills of the petitioner relates to time of extension, but it is admitted fact the said work was completed within extended time (i.e. till 10.07.2011), so deduction with regard to time of extension is totally illegal and liable to refundable to the petitioner immediately. (iv) For further directing the concerned respondent to not take any coercive steps against the petitioner till the disposal of this instant writ application, because the authorities are giving threatening to the petitioner for black-listing as well as forfeiting entire security deposit amount as well as all payable amount after rescinding the contract in question. (v) For passing such an order or orders for which, the petitioner is entitled under the law in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a registered Contractor with the Department of Water Resources, Government of Bihar and in response to a notice inviting tender, it participated in the tender and was selected and final agreement dated 25.04.2011 was entered into between the parties for - 3 - the anti erosion work for restoration of damage spur nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 of Ismailpur-Bind Toli Embankment D/S Vikramshila Setu, Naugachia within the district of Bhagalpur. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the work order was passed on 25.04.2011 and the date for completion of work was fixed as 31.05.2011, which was subsequently extended by the authorities up to 10.07.2011 and within that time the petitioner had completed the work, but full payment has not been made for want of fund and only part payment was made. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that it is a contractual matter and for payment of the alleged amount, the petitioner should have moved the authorities concerned and there is no occasion for this Court to interfere in such matters, specially when an F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioner. 5. Be that as it may, if the amount claimed by the petitioner or any part thereof is admitted by the respondents, they are duty bound to pay the same. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an application before the Executive Engineer, Flood Control Division, Naugachia within the district of Bhagalpur raising its entire claim giving details of the amount to be paid and interest thereon. If such an application is filed by the petitioner within fifteen days from today along with a copy of this order, the said authority shall decide the same by a speaking order in accordance with law within two months thereafter and if any amount or interest is found to be admitted and payable, the same should be paid to the petitioner by the said authority - 4 - immediately thereafter. However, if any amount or interest is not found payable and admitted in the said order, the petitioner will be at liberty to challenge the same before an appropriate forum. MPS/ (S.N.Hussain, J.)