Back
WASIM SADIQ NARGAL
Rehmatullah Naik, S/o. Haji Mohd. Shafi Naik – Appellant
Versus
U. T. of Jammu and Kashmir, Through its Commissioner/Secretary to Govt. to J&K, Public Works Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Brief Facts :
1. The petitioner, through the medium of the instant writ petition has prayed for the following reliefs:
Quashing Govt. order No.215-PW(R&B) of 2022 dated 01.07.2022 issued by respondent no.1 where by the claim of the petitioner for release of admitted liability amounting to Rs.20.74 lacs has been rejected illegally arbitrarily and without any lawful justification.
Mandamus
(i) Commanding the respondents to release the outstanding admitted liability amounting to Rs. 20.74 lacs (Rupees Twenty Lac and Seventy Four Thousand only) in favour of the petitioner on account of work done with regard to work i.e. upgradation of Chacknarwah link road by way of providing and laying 25 mm thick SDBC (Semi Dense Bituminous Concrete) over 50 mm thick Bituminous Macadam under improvement of City/Town roads.
(ii) Commanding the respondents to pay interest @9% per annum on account of delay from the date the same is due as per the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court.
(iii) Any other benefit to which this Hon’ble Court deems the petitioner entitled to may also be granted in favour of petitioner in the circumstances of the case.”
2. The petitioner, through the m
The High Court has the jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition involving disputed questions of fact in contractual matters with the State and its instrumentalities.
State cannot withhold admitted dues for executed works from which it benefited, citing procedural lapses or paucity of funds; such arbitrary action violates Article 14, attracting writ jurisdiction u....
State cannot withhold admitted dues for executed and accepted public works citing paucity of funds or lack of privity among instrumentalities; violates Article 14, warrants interest on delay.
State and instrumentalities cannot withhold admitted dues for executed and accepted works on paucity of funds or privity pleas; violates Article 14; writ maintainable; interest payable for arbitrary ....
State and instrumentalities jointly liable for admitted dues on executed and accepted public works; cannot withhold payments citing no privity, paucity of funds or delays, violating Article 14; must ....
The Court determined that contractual disputes involving factual questions requiring evidence must be resolved outside the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Delay and laches cannot be invoked by the government to deny an admitted claim for payment, emphasizing the need for timely compensation to contractors.
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
