WP(C) 5499/2007 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA The matter relates to alleged non-payment of Contractor’s bill amounting to Rs. 50,952/-, which according to the petitioner, it is entitled to for the contract work, the husband of the petitioner has carried out with the respondents. I have heard Mr. J. Purakayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned State Counsel. According to Mr. Purkayastha, the husband of the petitioner has carried out the contract work as indicated in the writ petition, Ms. Chakraborty, learned State Counsel, on the other hand submits that the matter needs examination by the resp ondents. In view of the above and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, th e writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to examine th e claim of the petitioner and upon such examination, if it is found that the pet itioner is entitled to the aforesaid amount of Rs. 50,952/- for the contract wor k which her husband carried out under the respondents, the same shall be disburs ed to the petitioner. The entire exercise shall be carried out within a period o f three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, whi ch the petitioner shall furnish to the respondents along with a copy of the writ petition and its enclosures. The respondents may also verify as to whether the petitioner executed the works in question at all and if so, whether as per the specification of the work order and to the satisfaction of the respondents. The respondents may also examine as to whether the claim made by the petitioner is barred by limitation.