Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA
Rahul Bisht – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep Sharma, J.
1. By way of present writ petition, petitioner has prayed for following main relief:
“(a) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents to immediately release the 1st & Final Bill of the work done as prepared by the Assistant Engineer, Nankhari i.e. respondent No. 4 (Annexure P-3) and Memorandum of Payment (Annexure P-4) as prepared by the Executive Engineer (B&R) Division Rampur Bushahr amounting to Rs. 40.00 lacs alongwith commercial rate of interest @ 12.75%.”
2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner is that though petitioner herein has successfully completed the work of construction awarded to him vide letter 15.09.2023, for an amount of Rs.54,45,812/-, but yet he is not being paid amount due to him. To substantiate factum with regard to completion of work as well as preparation of final bill, Mr. Goel, learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner specifically invited attention of this Court to Annexures P-3 and P-4, perusal whereof clearly reveals that Site Engin
Writ petitions against the State for contractual obligations are maintainable even with disputed facts; courts can direct payment when liability is clear.
Writ petitions against State entities for payment of due amounts are maintainable even with disputed facts; contract completion obligates the State to release funds promptly.
Writ petitions against State for contractual obligations are maintainable even with disputed facts; non-payment of dues despite work completion warrants judicial intervention.
A writ petition can be maintained against the State for contractual obligations even in the presence of disputed facts, ensuring fair treatment under Article 14.
Writ jurisdiction is not suitable for resolving contractual disputes involving disputed facts; such matters should be adjudicated in civil courts or through arbitration.
The power to issue prerogative writs under Article 226 of the Constitution is not limited by any other provisions of the Constitution. The High Court has the discretion to entertain or not to enterta....
Writ petitions for recovery of amounts due under contract are not maintainable when claims are disputed; such matters should be resolved in Civil Court or through Arbitration.
The court mandated that administrative bodies must consider representations and issue reasoned decisions within a specified timeframe, ensuring procedural fairness.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
