IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15733 of 2005 Kalawati Devi widow of Late Sankar Prasad, resident of Mohalla- Srinagar, P.S.- Siwan Muffasil, District-Siwan. …..Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Secretary Rural Development Department Bihar, Patna. 3. The Special Secretary Rural Development Department, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Engineer of Chief Rural Development Department, Bihar, Patna. 5. The Superintendent Engineer, Rural Engineering Organisation Circle, Chapra. 6. The Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Organisation, Work Division, Siwan. …..Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Prabhakar Singh, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Shashi Shekhar Pd. Sinha, A.C to G.P. 17. ----------- 04/ 14.11.2011 1. I.A. No.7245 of 2011 has been filed by one Kalawati Devi for being substituted in place of the petitioner claiming that the petitioner died on 22.11.2008 leaving behind the applicant as his heir who immediately after coming to know about the writ petition has filed this application along with her duly executed vakalatnama . Accordingly, this interlocutory application is allowed. Let the widow of the deceased petitioner be substituted in his place. 2. This writ petition had been filed by the original petitioner challenging order dated 24.09.2005 by which the Secretary Rural Development Department, Govt. of Bihar rejected the original petitioner’s prayer for payment of Rs.1,79,672.00 and Rs.84,062.00 for the work done by him as per the agreement between the parties for the year 1998-1999 dated 15.02.2000 to 17.02.2000 for various works detailed in paragraphs 5 to 8 of the writ petition. - 2 - 3. It transpires that earlier the original petitioner had filed CWJC No.14331 of 2003 for the same reliefs and the said writ petition was disposed of by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.02.2005 with a liberty to the petitioner to raise his claim by filing a writ petition along with a copy of this order before the Engineer-in-Chief, Rural Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna within three weeks, who was directed to examine the matter and pass appropriate orders within three months and if the claim was upheld, the admitted dues were directed to be paid. 4. However, the claim of the petitioner was rejected by the said authority by the impugned order against which this writ petition has been filed. However, after rejection of the petitioner’s claim, contractual amount claimed by the petitioner becomes disputed which can be decided either in a suit or in arbitral proceeding as per the terms of the contract. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to approach an appropriate forum for the reliefs claimed by him. Sunil (S. N. Hussain, J.)