IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12768 of 2008 Upendra Kumar, Son of Dharmeshwar Singh, resident of village- Dariyapur, Karpir, Arwal, District- Arwal. ….. Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Water Resources Department, Vikas Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 3. Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Anisabad, Patna. 4. Superintending Engineer, Ganga-Sone Flood Security Circle, Patna. 5. Executive Engineer, Sone Canal Division, Khagaul, Patna. 6. Sub-Divisional Officer, Sone Canal Sub-division, Arwal. 7. Executive Engineer, Quality Control Division, Anisabad, Patna. 8. Sub-Divisional Officer, Quality Control Sub-division, Daudnagar, Khagaul, Patna. …..Respondents. ----------- 02 20.03.2009 A counter affidavit has been filed in which it is stated that a cheque of Rs. 1,85,166/- dated 04.03.2009 has been issued in favour of the petitioner in full and final settlement of his claim. Learned counsel for the petitioner has no instruction in this matter. In my view, no useful purpose would be served by keeping this writ petition pending. The gross amount claimed by the petitioner is about Rs. 2,86,167/-, the cheque payment in settlement thereof is of Rs. 1,85,166/-. Thus, about Rs. 1,00,000/- has been deducted for which no details have been furnished. Learned counsel for the State has written instructions in that regard. The deductions shown are in relation to security deposit of Rs. 17,170/-, other deposits of Rs. 57,234/-, Income Tax Rs. 6,410/-, Sale Tax Rs. 11,447/- and royalty of Rs. 8,740/-. So far as taxes and royalty are concerned, nothing can be said about them but so far as the security deposit and other deposits are concerned, surely they are not to be retained by the State. Once the 2 contract is over all security deposits are there for due performance of the contract and once the contract has been executed these amounts are also liable to be immediately refunded. I, there, direct the respondent-Executive Engineer to see that the amounts, as discussed above, are refunded. Unless there are some compelling reasons for not refunding the same then it has to be disclosed to the petitioner. The petitioner has remedies in accordance with law. With this observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)