The court's decision highlighted the principle of mandamus, emphasizing the obligation of the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim and take a decision within a stipulated period, in accordance with the rules and as per law.

ORDER :

1. Petitioners through the medium of instant writ petition seek the following reliefs:-

“Mandamus:-Commanding the respondents to release and pay an amount of Rs. 3,65,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh and Sixty Five Thousand only) along with interest prevalent in the market, i.e., 18% p.a from the date the work has been completed till its actual realization within a stipulated period of time;

or

Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may in the given facts and circumstances of the case deem fit and proper may also be granted in favour of the petitioners.”

2. The facts under the shade and cover of which the instant petition has been filed are that the petitioner is a Government Contractor and is registered with the Government in the list of Government Contractors under the name and style "M/S Kuldeep Raj Pandoh & Sons Reasi". The respondent issued E-NIT No. 22 of 2018-19 under Endorsement for construction of office cum Laboratory Block for Mahaseer Brood Bank at Bindi Kalakote, District Rajouri. The petitioner being approved and eligible contractor registered with the J&K Government having vast experience in handling and execution departmental work, raised bid in the above said E-NIT and the said bid of the petitioner for the construction of office cum Laboratory Block for Mahaseer Brood Bank at Bindi Kalakote District Rajouri was accepted by the respondent and he was allotted work vide office Allotment No. SAE/D/18/953-56 dated 12.12.2018 being the lowest bidder.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner as per the terms and conditions of the allotment, started the construction work for construction of office cum Laboratory Block for Mahaseer Brood Bank at Bindi Kalakote District Rajouri and has completed the work in the month of November, 2019 and after completion of the aforesaid work, it was inspected and the Supervising Officer found nothing defective in the work and, as such, the Supervising Engineer of the department has prepared the estimates of the total cost of the work to the tune of Rs. 29,04,536/-. The estimate was submitted to the higher authority to clear the liability of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that despite the fact that work was completed by the petitioner well within time and the estimate was submitted to the department for release of the payment to the tune of Rs. 29,04,536/-, only a part payment to the tune of Rs. 25,39,000/- has been released in this regard and balance amount of Rs. 3,65,000/- has been withheld by the respondent department without any reasons.

5. Feeling aggrieved of the same, the petitioner, time and again, requested the respondent to release the balance payment, as he has purchased the construction material and paid the labour out of his hard earned money and in this regard, the petitioner filed various representations before the respondents, to which the respondents did not pay any heed and the same are undecided till date.

6. Feeling dissatisfied and aggrieved of the aforesaid inaction on the part of the respondents, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant writ petition.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would feel satisfied, if the instant writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to treat the instant writ petition as representation and accord consideration to the same within some reasonable period.

8. Notice.

9. Mr. Amit Gupta, learned AAG waives notice on behalf of the official respondents. He submits that the respondents have no objection, if the instant writ petition is directed to be treated as representation and same is accorded consideration strictly in accordance with the rules and as per law.

10. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the instant writ petition is disposed of, at the threshold, with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner by treating th