IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14225 of 2011 Raj Nandan Singh S/O Sri Shyam Nandan Singh R/O Vill.:-Pilitch, P.O.:-Pilitch, P.S.:-Parwalpur, Distt.:-Nalanda, State:-Bihar. …Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Deptt. Null 'Vishweshwaraiya Bhawan', Bailey Road, Patna-1. 2. The Engineer-In-Chief, Road Construction Deptt. 'Vishweshwaraiya Bhawan', Bailey Road, Patna-1. 3. The Chief Engineer (South), Road Construction Deptt. 'Vishweshwaraiya Bhawan', Bailey Road, Patna-1. 4. The Superintending Engineer, Road Construction Deptt. Patna Road Circle, Chajjubagh, Patna. 5. The Executive Engineer, Road Construction Deptt., Works Division Nalanda At Biharsharif. 6. The District Magistate (D.M.) Nalanda At Biharsharif. 7. The Office-In-Charge, District Development Section Nalanda At Biharsharif. …. Respondents ---------------------------------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Manish Sahay, Advocate For Respondents 2 to 5: Mrs. Kiran Kumari, A.C. to G.A.7 -------- 02/ 04.11.2011 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 quashing letter no. 178 dated 18.01.2011, issued under the signature of Officer in charge, District Development Section, Nalanda, (as contained in Annexure 4), directing the concerned respondent to pay the admitted dues amount i.e. Rs. 1,98,282/- (Rupees one lac ninety eight thousand two hundred eighty two) only to the petitioner immediately for extra work done relates to work namely “Construction of Road from Ashanagar Pandit Kuan via Deviasthan to Soh Sarai-Noor Sarai Road under Mukhya Mantri Samekit Sahari Vikas 2 Yojana Part-II for the year 2009-10”. Because after taking work from the petitioner the payment of the same is not being made on the sole ground that the District Magistrate, Nalanda has refused to grant administrative approval for the revised estimate without assigning any reason. (ii) For further directing the concerned respondent to pay interest @ 18% per annum upon the said amount from the date of its due and till the date of payment of the same. (iii) For passing such another order or orders for which the petitioner is entitled under the law in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. In this case a counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Engineer-in-Chief, Superintending Engineer and the Executive Engineer of the Road Construction Department, but no counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the District Magistrate, Nalanda (respondent no.6), although this writ petition had been filed after service of notice of this writ petition in the office of the Advocate General on 22.06.2011 and the main challenge is against the order of the District Magistrate dated 18.01.2011 (Annexure 4), by which he refused to grant sanction to the revised estimate sent by the Road Construction Department for additional work done by the petitioner. 4. In the counter-affidavit, the stand of respondents no.2 to 5 has been clarified in paragraph no.4 thereof, which reads as follows :- “That it is pertinent to mention here that for the aforesaid construction work administrative approval for 3 Rs.24,79,400.00 was accorded by the District Magistrate, Nalanda vide memo no. 57-05/08/179 dated 18.02.2009 and tender was approved by the concerned respondent on 15% below rate i.e. for Rs.20,86,734.00. During the construction some circumstances had occurred before the contractor for which the extra work was done that is earth work, GSB, dry lean concrete, cement concrete pavement under the supervision of respondent no.5 and his subordinates. Extra work was done as per site requirement and the revised estimate of Rs.26,83,805.00 was submitted to the District Magistrate, Nalanda vide Executive Engineer’s letter no. 1939 w.e. dated 29.11.2010 and the Officer in- charge Zila Vikash Sakha, Nalanda reported disapproval of the revised estimate vide letter no. 178 dated 18.01.2011 (Annexure 4).” 5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the respective claim of the parties and the conspicuous silence of the District Magistrate, Nalanda in that regard, it is quite apparent that the impugned order of the District Magistrate is absolutely a non-speaking order not giving any reason for passing that order or for rejecting the revised estimate sent by the Executive Engineer dated 29.11.2010 (Annexure 3 series). Furthermore, the materials on record sufficiently show that the petitioner had done additional work at the instance of respondent-authorities, due to which revised estimate had been sent and the District Magistrate had no reason at all to refuse the same. In the said circumstances, the impugned order of the District Magistrate, Nalanda dated 18.01.2011 (Annexure 4) is hereby quashed. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the 4 petitioner is directed to approach the Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Works Division, Nalanda (respondent no.5) by way of filing an application giving details of his claim. If such an application is filed by the petitioner along with a copy of this order within fifteen days from today, the said authority shall immediately consider the matter and pay all the dues of the additional works done by the petitioner as per the revised estimate submitted by the Executive Engineer (respondent no.5) immediately thereafter, not later than two months. MPS/ ( S. N. Hussain, J.)