IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9596 of 2010 M/S CALYX, THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR KRISHNA KANT MISHRA, R/O MOHALLA GANNIPUR, MISHRA TOLA,P.O. MUZAFFARPUR G.P.O., P.S. - KAZI MOHAMADPUR,DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR,BIHAR………………PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE SECRETARY, PHED, PATNA. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PHED, PATNA. 4. THE REGIONAL CHIEF ENGINEER, PHED, PATNA. 5. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, P.H. MECH., CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.H. MECH., DIVISION, MUZAFFARPUR. 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.H. MECH., DIVISION, BETTIAH……………………..RESPONDENTS. For the petitioner : Mr. Shantanu Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Ritesh Kumar, AC to AAG-I ----------- 05/ 01.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents State of Bihar and its authorities. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for a direction to the respondents to make payment of Rs.3, 27, 481.00 to the petitioner which is still due against the electrification work done at R/W/S/ Nautan (West Champaran) for supply, installation and commissioning of 63 KV transformer distribution and 11000/433 volt extension of HT/LT line vide Purchase Order No.447 dated 17.08.2006. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had been sending representations after representations (Annexures-2, 5, 6 and 9) before the authorities for payment of the remaining dues, but no heed is being paid to those representations, although more than several years have lapsed and the respondents in their reply dated 27.04.2010 (Annexure-7 to the petitioner’s legal notice dated 19.04.2010) admitted 2 the said dues. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the fund for the said purpose had been provided by the State Government but the said fund is being diverted for new tenders, which is apparent from the notice issued by the Office of Executive Engineer, P.H.E.D. Muzaffarpur (Annexure-8). 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposes the contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the remaining amount will be paid to the petitioner as soon as the fund is received from the State Government. However, Annexure-B as well as the respondents’ reply dated 27.04.2010 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) clearly shows that an amount of Rs.5, 81, 000.00 had been allocated for the said purpose. Furthermore, from paragraph-7 of the counter affidavit it is also clear that the respondents had admitted that the dues of the petitioner was Rs.5, 19, 886.00 out of which Rs.2, 05, 000.00 was paid to the petitioner through Cheque No. VV 089510 dated 17.01.2007 and the remaining amount of Rs.3, 14, 886.00 was not paid to the petitioner because of non- availability of fund. 5. In the said circumstances, the respondents authorities are directed to pay the admitted remaining dues of Rs.3, 14, 886.00 to the petitioner within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 6. If the rule provides for payment of any interest on the said dues, the petitioner will be at liberty to file a representation before the authorities concerned for the same. 3 7. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this writ petition is disposed of. Harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)