Once the work has been executed by the petitioner to the satisfaction of respondents, it is not open to the respondents to withhold the payment: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR Reserved on: 28.10.2021 Pronounced on: 10.11.2020 WP(C) No.1754 2021 CM No.5840 2021 M S AL QAIMOON CONSTRUCTIONS ...PETITIONER(S) Through: Mr. M. A. Beigh Advocate. COMMR SECRETARY & ORS. Through: Mr. Irfan Andleeb Dy. AG. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR JUDGE Petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking a direction upon respondents to release a sum of Rs.24 37 410 in its favour which according to the petitioner is outstanding in respect of the works executed by it pursuant to allotment order No.PHB 7977 79 dated is averred the petition in response to NIT No.24 PHED Bijbehara of 2019 20 dated 13.12.2019 through e tendering process the petitioner offered its bids and thereafter vide allotment order No.PHB 7911 79 dated 18.01.2020 the work for construction of 0.75 lac Gallons RCC dome type clear water sump for 2 water supply scheme Shoul Sarsona was allotted in favour of the petitioner. The cost of the work was Rs37.11 lacs. It is further averred that after the allotment of work the agreement contract No.655 PHB of 1 2020 was executed by respondents in favour of the petitioner whereafter the petitioner started execution of the work by mobilizing men and machinery. It is further averred that after successful completion of the allotted work the same was checked and measured by the respondents and a bill in the amount of Rs.28 76 000 was raised by the petitioner before respondent No.5. After verification and authentication of this bill net amount of Rs.24 37 410 was found payable in favour of the petitioner. According to the petitioner this amount has remained unpaid though the same is not being disputed by the respondents. It is further averred that a Committee constituted by the respondents in terms of Government Order No.49 JK(JSD) of 2021 dated 25.02.2021 conducted physical verification of the works done which included the work allotted to the petitioner and the said Committee has physically verified the work executed by the petitioner. Finally petitioner has submitted that despite repeated requests to the respondents the admitted amount of Rs.24 37 410 has not been paid to the petitioner who has raised bank loan to execute the work in Reply on behalf of respondents has been filed. In their reply respondents have admitted that the work in question was allotted in 3 favour of the petitioner in terms of allotment order dated 18.01.2020. It is also admitted by respondents that after completion of work petitioner had submitted bills which have been passed for an amount of Rs.24 37 410 . It is averred that the Committee constituted by the Government for physical verification of the work executed under languishing projects has also conducted physical verification of the work executed by the petitioner and it has submitted its report to the Government. However it is submitted that the response of the Government regarding release of payment of the petitioner is still awaited and as and when the Government will issue orders for release of the payment the same will be released in accordance with rules in favour of the petitioner. material on record. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the From the response of the respondents it is clear that they have not raised any dispute as regards their liability to pay the amount of Rs.24 37 410 to the petitioner. The allotment of work and its execution by the petitioner has also been admitted. The amount claimed by the petitioner from the respondents is also not in dispute and it is also not in dispute that the work has been physically verified by the Government. The only plea taken by respondents in their reply is that they are awaiting release of payment from the Government so that the same is released in favour of the petitioner. Thus it is a case of admitted liability by the respondents. Once the work has been executed by the 4 petitioner to the satisfaction of respondents it is not open to the respondents to withhold the payment. If the respondents were short of funds they should not have gone ahead with the allotment of work and withheld the payment of the petitioner. The inaction on the part of respondents has definitely caused a lot of harassment and inconvenience to the petitioner. Such an attitude on the part of Government functionaries cannot be countenanced. The petitioner cannot be made to wait for years together for his legitimate dues. For the foregoing reasons the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay an amount of Rs.24 37 410 to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of this order. The petitioner shall also be entitled to interest @6% from the date of filing of this petition till realization of aforesaid amount. The petition shall stand disposed of in above terms. Judge “Bhat Altaf PS” Whether the order is speaking: Yes No Whether the order is reportable: Yes No 

Summary: If the respondents were short of funds, they should not have gone ahead with the allotment of work and withheld the payment of the petitioner. The inaction on the part of respondents has definitely caused a lot of harassment and inconvenience to the petitioner. Such an attitude on the part of Government functionaries cannot be countenanced. The petitioner cannot be made to wait for years together for his legitimate dues. The aforesaid has been considered by the High Court of Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Ladakh while adjudicating the case of  M/S AL-Qaimoon Constructions v. Commr/Secretary &amp; Ors. [ WP(C) No.1754/2021 CM No.5840/2021] which was decided upon by the single judge bench comprising Justice Sanjay Dhar on 10th November 2021. The facts of the case are as follows. It is averred in the petition that in response to NIT through etendering process, the petitioner offered its bids and thereafter, the work for construction of 0.75 lac Gallons RCC dome type clear water sump for water supply scheme, Shoul Sarsona was allotted in favour of the petitioner. The cost of the work was Rs37.11 lacs. It is further averred that after the allotment of work was executed by respondents in favour of the petitioner whereafter the petitioner started execution of the work by mobilizing men and machinery. It is further averred that after successful completion of the allotted work, the same was checked and measured by the respondents and a bill in the amount of Rs.28,76,000/ was raised by the petitioner before respondent No.5. After verification and authentication of this bill, net amount of Rs.24,37,410/ was found payable in favour of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, this amount has remained unpaid though the same is not being disputed by the respondents. The court perused the facts and arguments presented. It was of the opinion that “ it is a case of admitted liability by the respondents. The respondents are directed to pay an amount of Rs.24,37,410/ (Rupees twenty-four lacs thirty-seven thousand and four hundred ten only) to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of this order. The petitioner shall also be entitled to interest @6% from the date of filing of this petition till realization of aforesaid amount.”