Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.S. Ramachandra Rao, CJ., DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.
Jitendra Singh S/o Late Brahmdeo Singh – Appellant
Versus
Secretary, Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.
1. The petitioner in the writ petition was awarded a contract by the Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation Division, Hazaribag under the National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) for construction of Mini Rural Pipe Water Supply System in village Barikola Jhonjhi vide a contract dt. 06.03.2013 and in another village-Dato Kala also on the same date (Annexures-1 & 2).
2. Pursuant thereto, work orders were issued and the petitioner completed the works and handed over the Mini Rural Pipe Water Supply System to the authorities in both the villages and has filed Annexure-3 letter dt. 15.04.2017 in support of the same.
3. Petitioner has placed reliance on Annexure-5 letter dt. 24.11.2018, in which the Respondent 4 had requested for release of funds from Respondent 2 for payments for the works completed under Mini Rural Water Supply Scheme 4197, CRF and others, which also mentions the two contracts given to petitioner, and contends that there is an admission of liability on part of respondents to make him payments indicated therein for the works executed by him.
4. Petitioner contends that he had made a claim before the respondents and demanded t
Government must fulfill contractual obligations and cannot use delay as a defense when their own inaction causes the delay; courts uphold citizens' claims against unfair government practices.
Excessive delay in approaching the court undermines writ jurisdiction, necessitating dismissal of claims lacking timely justification.
Delay and laches cannot be invoked by the government to deny an admitted claim for payment, emphasizing the need for timely compensation to contractors.
Contractual payments must not be unduly delayed by the state without valid justification.
The court will not entertain petitions filed after excessive delay, as it undermines the rights of other parties and contradicts the principles of equitable jurisdiction.
The principle of delay and laches precludes a litigant from being entertained for judicial relief when there is excessive delay without adequate justification, impacting the rights of other parties.
The court reinforced that undue delay, along with substantive violations, can lead to the dismissal of writ petitions under Article 226.
The significance of admitted liabilities, conflicting stands, and serious disputed questions of fact in contractual matters, and the discretion of the court in exercising jurisdiction.
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
