Article 226 writ maintainable for arbitrary withholding of certified contract payments by State instrumentalities, despite contractual nature.

JUDGMENT : 
K. V. Jayakumar, J.

This Writ Petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) Declare that the petitioner is entitled to payment of amounts covered by Exts.P6 to P20 with interest for the work done by the petitioner, which were certified as completed satisfactorily;

(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, directing the respondents 6 to 11 to disburse the amounts covered by Exts. P6 to P20 to the petitioner forthwith;

(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, directing the respondents 3 to 5 to pass orders to disburse the amount due to the petitioner covered by Exts. P6 to P20 with interest;

(iv) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, directing the respondents 6 to 11 to disburse interest at the rate of 12% for the amount due to the petitioner under Exts. P6 to P20 bills from the 45th day from the respective dates of each bill.”

2. The petitioner states that he is a registered A-class Electrical Contractor engaged in executing contract works for the 3rd respondent, Travancore Devaswom Board for the past 20 years without any default. The petitioner asserts that he has extensive experience in undertaking electrical works for various governmental agencies.

3. The petitioner further submits that he has commenced and completed as many as 18 works for the 3rd respondent Board as authorized by its officers during the past 3 years. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, an amount of Rs. 50 lakhs is due to him for the works already completed by him satisfactorily. According to him, despite satisfactory completion of the works, the sanctioned amount is deliberately not disbursed to the petitioner by the officers of the 3rd respondent Board, contrary to the norms set by the 3rd respondent.

4. The petitioner further contended that he has completed works worth Rs. 80 lakhs during the period 2022-24. Despite the submission of several representations by him, the respondents had failed to make payment. The petitioner contended that an amount of Rs. 23,00,000/- (Twenty-Three Lakh Rupees) was released as advance by the respondents. Later on 19/5/2025 and 21/6/2025, Rs. 1,44,604/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty-Four Thousand Six Hundred and Four) and Rs. 1,00,499/- (Rupees One Lakh Four Hundred and Ninety-Nine) were disbursed to the petitioner's account by the 6th respondent. Still, an amount of Rs.50,35,106/- (Fifty Lakhs Thirty-Five Thousand One Hundred and Six Rupees) is due for the works completed by the petitioner till date. He has produced Ext.P3, a copy of the bank statement, to substantiate his claim.

5. The petitioner further states that he has submitted Ext.P5 representation showing the consolidated list of the works done by him for the period 2022-25 and the amounts due to him. He has also stated the particulars of the works awarded to him, the amounts released so far and the amounts outstanding along with the necessary documents in support thereof.

6. The 3rd respondent has filed a detailed counter refuting the claim of the petitioner. It is stated in the counter that the writ petition is filed alleging falsehood and suppressing material facts. The writ petition is not maintainable as the subject matter of the writ petition concerns the disputes with regard to the contractual obligation between the parties and it involves disputed questions of fact. It is submitted that payments to the contractors are made according to priority and all pending bills