IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8803 of 2009 MANOJ KUMAR SINGH Versus THE BIHAR STATE HOUSING BOARD & ORS ----------- 3 6.8.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner was allotted the work of sinking H.Y.tubewell 300 mm x 200 mm size, 126 M. depth with development by Rotary rig machines at Ashikpur, Sasaram under Scheme no.11262. After drilling 215 feet depth, the petitioner encountered with hard rock and the drilling became difficult. The petitioner filed a representation dated 4.7.2008, as contained in Annexure-3, before the Executive Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board, Gaya Division stating therein that as he was only having soil drilling machine and as such he was unable to drill the hard rock. The petitioner further stated that there was no agreement to drill the hard work. The Executive Engineer on due verification approved the work done by the petitioner and even recommended for its payment vide its letter dated 6.9.2008 addressed to the Superintending Engineer, Work Circle, Bihar State Housing Board, Patna who vide its letter no.458 dated 13.9.2008 addressed to the Chief Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board, Patna was also of the view that the agreement should be closed and necessary expenses incurred should be paid and enquiry be ordered for ascertaining the water level. The Chief Engineer vide its letter dated 5.1.2009 observed that in the earlier feasibility report submitted by the Central Ground Water 2 KHAN Board the depth of drilling was restricted to the depth of bed rock. After hearing counsel for the parties, this court is of the view that the Executive Engineer should seek a report from the Central Ground Water Board in respect of technical feasibility of further drilling at the relevant place as the petitioner was restricted to drill the soil at 215 feet depth due to hard rock and in spite of his best efforts he could not drill further which facts also finds support from the aforesaid letters of the Executive Engineer and Superintending Engineer. The petitioner would be entitled to payment for the quantum of work done by him and the authorities would make due payment to the petitioner after verifying his bills. In case the petitioner is aggrieved, he may file a fresh representation before the Chief Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board, Patna. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. (S.P.Singh,J)