The withholding of payment by the authorities post satisfactory completion of contractual obligations violates principles of unjust enrichment and contractual fairness.

ORDER :

1. The instant writ petition at the behest of a contractor, who was awarded with a contract for construction of additional office building under Basudevpur Municipality after having adjudged as a lower bidder.

2. The petitioner claimed to have executed the work to the satisfaction of the authority and handed over the same for beneficial use without any demand from any corner. While the petitioner was executing the work, the RA bills were submitted which were released from time to time, after recording the satisfaction on the quality and the quantity of work, which he undertook. The work was completed on 26.10.2024 and the possession was handed over to the authority on 24.11.2024. The petitioner submitted the final bill amounting to Rs.27.00 lakhs (approximately) which is withheld by the authority without assigning any reason in support thereof. The representations were made by the petitioner, yet there was no response from their end which compelled the petitioner to file the instant writ petition seeking a mandamus upon the opposite party No.6, Executive Officer, Basudevpur Municipality in terms of an agreement executed by and between the parties.

3. The writ petition was filed in the month of December, 2024 and was admitted on 11.02.2025 when a direction was passed upon the petitioner to apprise the Court as to whether he has completed the work within the time allotted in this regard.

3.1. The notices were issued upon the opposite parties, which, in fact, has been served and the Municipality as well as the State are represented.

4. On 08.05.2025, the direction was passed by the Court to file counter affidavit, but despite such direction having passed, no counter affidavit is filed till date. However, an additional affidavit is filed in the instant writ petition by the petitioner disclosing a document concerning the performance report of a contractor, i.e. the petitioner and a letter dated 28.02.2025 issued by the opposite party No.6, Executive Officer, Basudevpur Municipality.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after successful completion of the work entrusted upon him in terms of the agreement having entered in this regard, it is unjustified and unreasonable on the part of the authorities to withhold the payment of an amount relatable to the work having done by the petitioner. It is fervently submitted that once the performance report is issued by opposite party No.6, Executive Officer, Basudevpur Municipality with the remark that the works have been completed in good and orderly manner, the silence in releasing the money tantamount to unjust enrichment on the legitimate dues of the petitioner, and, therefore, a direction may be passed upon the authorities to release the said amount.

5.1. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.6-Muncipality submits that the petitioner did not complete the work as assigned to him in terms of the said agreement, and, therefore, the authorities have not released the amount as claimed by the petitioner. He vociferously submits that if the work is not done or completed by the petitioner, there is no obligation on the part of the Municipality to release the said amount.

5.2. In reply, it is submitted by the petitioner that the security amount was released by the authorities, which implies that the work had been completed, and, therefore, the stand of the Municipality is untenable.

6. On the backdrop of the aforesaid facts and the submissions advanced before us, the point involved in the instant writ petition is whether the authorities can withhold the payment of the bill submitted by the petitioner upon satisfactory completion of the work as entrusted to him in terms of the agreement so