IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7600 of 2006 VIJAY KUMAR SINGH . SON OF LATE SITA PRASAD, VILLAGE AND POST KAPURA, P.S. NAGAR NAUSA, DISTRICT NALANDA . Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, VISHWESHWARIA BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 2. THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF CUM ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, VISHWESHWARIYA BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER ( SOUTH) BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, VISHWESHWERAIYA BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PATNA HAWAN ANCHAL, BARAHIA HOUSE, EAST BORING CANAL ROAD, PATNA. 5. THE EXECUTI8VE ENGINEER, NALWADA BHAWAN PRAMANDAL, D.M. COLONY, BIHARSHARIF ( NALANDA) ----------- 3/ 30-11-2009 Heard. The Court is not wrong in drawing a conclusion that more than half of the writ applications filed before this Court are litigations which are unnecessarily created by the conduct of the respondent-authorities. Majority of the time it is either unfair or arbitrary decisions or sheer apathy of their conduct which leads to filing the writs before the High Court. Present case is one of such example which this Court is constrained to record. Petitioner was assigned the responsibility for carrying out various kinds of repair of Government’s buildings under the jurisdiction of respondent no.5, Executive Engineer, Nalanda Buildings Division, Biharsharif ( Nalanda). One of the works assigned to the - 2 - petitioner was for renovation work which had to be carried on the so-called Collectorate Buildings located in the district. After completion of the work bill was placed before the concerned authority for payment. Details have been reproduced in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the writ application which is supported by evidence, contained in Annexure-1 series. Irony is that the so-called bill was raised by the petitioner in the year 2002 but till date the payment has not been made to him on the ground that necessary funds are not available with the respondents to meet the obligation. This Court fails to understand as to why order was placed by the office for carrying out the work when there was no necessary fund available. Even if some emergent repair work had to be carried out why steps thereafter were not taken to ensure that the necessary funds are released from the Secretariat for making payment to the petitioner. The matter relates to Building Construction Department. Writ application stands disposed of with a direction to the Principal Secretary, Building Construction Department, Government of Bihar to seek necessary imputes from the District Magistrate in question including the Executive Engineer and thereafter take steps for payment of the claim of the petitioner. - 3 - The above order is being passed under the circumstances that the writ application has remained pending since the year 2006 but no counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents till date. Learned counsel for the State only informs the Court that the impute provided to him was unsatisfactory if not inadequate and that prevented him from drawing up any counter affidavit stating the stand of the respondent- authorities. Be that as it may, the responsibility will have to be saddled on the shoulders of the authorities who have created the present litigation without rhyme or reason. The Court expects that necessary steps shall be taken in the matter within four months from the date or communication/production of a copy of this order. ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J ) BTiwary/