IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.3190 of 2011 Date of Decision : February 22, 2011. Sanjeev Sehgal, Contractor .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.P.S.Rana, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner is an A-Class Government Contractor who is said to have been allotted the various construction works by respondent No.3. The petitioner avers that the works have been executed by him to the entire satisfaction of the authorities and thereafter, final bills have been submitted. It is alleged that despite the legal notice served on behalf of the the petitioner on 29.1.2011 (Annexure P-4), the respondents have not released the payment to the petitioner for the work admittedly executed by him. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the nature of relief sought in this writ petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the same with a direction to respondent Nos.2 to C.W.P.No .3190 of 2011 2 4 to consider and dispose of the afore-mentioned claim of the petitioner contained in his legal notice dated 29.1.2011 (Annexure P-4) by passing a speaking order, within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Needless to say that if the petitioner is found entitled to any payment, the same shall also be released to him within the stipulated period. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. February 22, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE