Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 2057
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J
Sri Ramsakal Singh – Appellant
Versus
The Union of India – Respondent
WPA 15616 of 2019
For the Appellant: Mr. Binay Kumar Panda, Mr. Raju Mondal, Mr. Subham Kanti Bhakat
For the Respondents: Mr. Sukanta Chakraborty, Mr. Anindya Halder
The court established that compliance with applicable regulations surrounding wage payments is essential for releasing payment owed to contractors.
Headnote:In this matter, the petitioner, an enlisted contractor, filed a writ petition against respondents for not clearing payment of RA and final bills post-completion of work assigned by the Damodar Valley Corporation. The earlier petition, WP No. 579(W) of 2015, was disposed of with instructions to ascertain payment status of the petitioner's employees’ wages and dues. The competent authority noted no non-payment allegations but required DVC officials to adhere to applicable regulations. Issues raised by respondents will be addressed via an affidavit-in-opposition. The ultimate direction is for further consideration after filing of related affidavits.
Mr. Binay Kumar Panda Mr. Raju Mondal Mr. Subham Kanti Bhakat ..…for the petitioner Mr. Sukanta Chakraborty Mr. Anindya Halder .…. for the respondent nos. 2 & 8 The present writ petition has been preferred citing inaction on the part of the concerned respondents in making payment of the RA and final bills, including the security deposit and earnest money, to the petitioner. The petitioner, being an enlisted contractor, was assigned certain work by the Damodar Valley Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “DVC”). Upon completion of the said work, the petitioner raised certain bills. However, those bills have not been cleared on the ground that DVC is uncertain as to whether wages and other statutory dues, including provident fund contributions, were paid to the petitioner’s employees.
Challenging the action of withholding such amount, a writ petition, being WP No. 579(W) of 2015, was preferred by the petitioner, which was disposed of by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by an order dated 1st August, 2017. The issue was relegated to the concerned respondents with a direction to ascertain whether the wages and other provident fund dues had been paid to the employees by the petitioner.
However, the fact-finding authority, by an order communicated to the petitioner under a covering letter dated 13th November, 2017, recorded that there was no allegation regarding non-payment of wages or other dues to the employees engaged by the petitioner. Nonetheless, in the concluding part of that order, it was noted that the DVC officials of Mejia Thermal Power Station (hereinafter referred to as “MTPS”) must satisfy themselves regarding observance/adherence to other applicable rules, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the work as stated in the work order and/or Agreement No. 21 of 2009-
2010 dated 31st July, 2009.
Mr. Chakraborty, learned Advocate representing respondent nos. 2 to 8, submits that the competent authority, in its order, directed the DVC officials of MTPS to satisfy themselves regarding observance/adherence to other rules, regulations, and the terms and conditions of work as stated in the work order and agreement. Mr. Chakraborty prays for leave to file an affidavit-in-opposition addressing the issues raised in the petition and to disclose whether the respondents are satisfied with the observance/adherence to the said rules and regulations.
In view thereof, the respondents are directed to file their affidavit-in-opposition to the writ petition within a period of three weeks from date, reply thereto, if any, may be filed within a period of one week thereafter.
List this matter for further consideration four weeks hence.
