A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is generally not the appropriate remedy for adjudicating contractual disputes involving disputed questions of fact, such as the verification of work measurements or departmental liability, which are better suited for resolution by civil courts or arbitration.

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

10.04.2026

1. Heard Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Praveen Das, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State.

2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs :-

“10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records pertaining to case of petitioner, from the respondents.

10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.5 to release the amount of Rs. 4,82,158/- along with interest from the date the bill became due, for electrical work completed at a Government High School in Baloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh completed on 16.03.2024.

10.3 To kindly grant any other relief which may be deem fit in the given facts and circumstances of the instant case.

10.4 Cost of the petition.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a small contractor engaged in execution of government works, contributing towards effective utilization of public funds, timely completion of projects, and ensuring that essential public infrastructure reaches the intended beneficiaries. He further submitted that the petitioner was awarded a contract vide work order dated 18.01.2024 for electrification work in the Government High School Building at Salihaghat, Block Bilaigarh, District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara, for a total contract value of Rs. 5.03 lakhs.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner duly executed and completed the entire work within the stipulated period on 16.03.2024 to the full satisfaction of the competent authorities. As per the Measurement Book and Memorandum of Payment, a sum of Rs. 4,82,158/- became due and payable to the petitioner, which remains undisputed. He further contended that the departmental authorities themselves have repeatedly acknowledged the completion of work and recommended release of payment through official communications dated 05.06.2024, 18.07.2024, 08.08.2024, and 26.12.2024. Even thereafter, a specific direction was issued on 07.05.2025 by the superior authority to ensure immediate payment of the petitioner’s dues. Despite such categorical recommendations and directions, the respondents have failed to release the admitted amount till date, without assigning any lawful justification.

5. It is further submitted by the learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner that the inaction on the part of the respondents is not only arbitrary but reflects gross administrative apathy. The excuse of increase in tender cost or pendency of administrative approval is wholly untenable in law and cannot be used as a ground to deny payment for work already executed and accepted by the department. He also stated that the petitioner had undertaken the work by arranging finances from private sources, and due to prolonged non-payment, he is facing severe financial distress, including mounting interest liabilities. The continued withholding of legitimate dues is causing irreparable injury and mental agony to the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel submits that the action of the respondents is violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, as it is arbitrary, unreasonable, and deprives the petitioner of his rightful dues without any authority of law. It is further submitted that the amount due to the petitioner, being an admitted and