N. Paul Vasanthakumar, C.J.—Heard Mrs. Aruna Thakur, learned counsel for the appellant in L.P. Appeal Nos.24 and 34 of 2016 and Mr. R. Koul, learned counsel for the appellant in L.P. Appeal No.16/2016 as also Mr. Anuj Sawhney, learned counsel for the appellant in L.P. Appeal No.22/2016.

2. These L.P. appeals are preferred against a common order made by the Writ Court in OWP Nos.1140/2003 and 441/2004 dated 11.03.2016. LPAOW Nos.24/2016 and 34/2016 have been preferred by the University and its officer, challenging the order of the Writ Court so far as directing the University to release the withheld amount in favour of the writ petitioners within a period of four weeks, while as LPAOW Nos.16/2016 & 22/2016 have been preferred by the writ petitioners against not ordering interest on the withheld amount as the same has been disallowed by the Writ Court.

3. The case of the petitioners in both the writ petitions before the Writ Court was that their proprietary concerns were allotted different construction works without their being any stipulation for payment of sums on account of any service taxes, duties, levies chargeable from the contractor in NIT or contract agreement. The p