The failure to release the security deposit within three months relaxed the estoppel against the contractor, allowing for the levying of interest.

SURESHWAR THAKUR. J.

1. It is not disputed amongst the contesting parties, before this Court, that the present petitioners had successfully executed the works, as became allotted to them. The said execution of works by the present petitioners occurred on 11.4.2005. However, the security amount comprised in a sum of Rs.60,78,387/- had become deposited by the present petitioners, before the agency concerned, vide challan No.73 dated 25.8.2005. It is further apparent on a reading of the reply, on affidavit, furnished to the present petition by the respondent-State, that a no objection certificate, was issued to the petitioners on 26.7.2010, but with a rider, that recovery, if found and detected by the auditing agency, thus would be realized from the said amount of security, as became deposited by the present petitioners.

2. Further-more, it is also mentioned in the reply on affidavit, that since the petitioners, did not liquidate the relevant installments, within the stipulated period of time, thus thereby they violated condition No.2 of the agreement, condition whereof has been extracted hereinafter.

“2. Mode of payment of contract money-The contractors shall deposit the balance contract money for the first year of the contract with the Mining Officer, Patiala & S.A.S., Nagar (Mohali) in equal quarterly installments in advance on the 15th July, 15th October and 15th January. The contract money for the subsequent years of the contract shall be paid by the contractors in advance in equal installments on the 15th April, 15th July, 15th October and 15th January in each year.”

3. Consequently, it is contended that in terms of condition No.2 of the contract, as became executed amongst the petitioners, and, the respondent, the petitioners are liable to pay interest @ 18% p.a. for the relevant period relating to delayed payments of such installments. Therefore, it is further spelt in the reply on affidavit, that after deducting the above amount of Rs.8,46,613/-, thus from the security deposit(Supra), thereby only a sum of Rs.60,78,387/- becomes the outstanding disbursable security amount to the present petitioners.

4. However, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits, that since the petitioners earlier accessed this Court through theirs filing a writ petition No.23022 of 2018, and, that thereon the hereinafter extracted order become passed:-

“Learned counsel for the petitioners states that despite the fact that mining contract has been concluded successfully, the respondents are not releasing security amount although numerous representations have been made in this regard.

We, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the claim set up by the petitioners, dispose of the instant petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation made by the petitioners by passing a speaking order, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Disposed of.”.

5. However, he submits that the respondent concerned, through the passing of impugned order Annexure P-5, has declined to the petitioners, the relief of interest to be levied, on the delayed payment, and, or refund of the above amount of security. Therefore, the petitioners are led to re-access this Court to thus make a challenge to Annexure P-5.

6. Though in the reply on affidavit furnished to the petition, it has been stated, that in terms of Clause 19 of the contract, which became executed between the parties, clause whereof becomes extracted hereinafter, there is a mandate against the security deposits rather carrying interest. Therefore, it is contended, that the impugned order Annexure P-5 is a validly made order, and, that the petitioners are not entitled to levying of any interest, thus on the delayed releases of the security amounts (Supra) to them.

“Security deposit shall carry no interest-The security deposited by the contractors shall not carry any interest. It shall be re