Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

1 Heard Mr. Virendra Kashyap and Mr. Sibasish Mishra, learned DbKC RKC yUH ig UO H RMA itO N HMA a A lH DR l N I y A I R T Ts DR A ig R ne A d c le o a u r n n s e e d l A fo d r d i t t h io e n a p l e A tit d io v n o e ca r. t e A G ls e o n e h ra e l a , r d ap M pe r. a r S in h g a s fo h r a n t k he T h S a ta ku te r, /respondents.

2 The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:

“10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no. 2 to forthwith release and disburse the admitted and duly measured running bill amount of approximately 7.20 lakhs, pertaining to the work executed by the petitioner under the work order dated 28.07.2023, which was forwarded for payment on 13.06.2025.

10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to direct the respondent no. 2 to immediately depute competent technical officers to the project site for carrying out physical verification, measurement and recording in respect of the construction work already executed by the petitioner to the extent of approximately 25 lakhs in accordance with law and the terms of the agreement dated 28.07.2023.

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to pass such further orders or directions as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3 Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a registered civil contractor carrying on the business of execution of public works in the name of M/s Dhar Mahadev Construction, Raipur, and is regularly undertaking construction works for various local bodies and public authorities within the State of Chhattisgarh. The petitioner participated in an e-tender process initiated by the respondent authority for construction of “Mahila Samriddhi Market Work” with an estimated cost of ₹85.65 lakhs pursuant to Notice Inviting Tender dated 16.05.2023. Upon evaluation, the petitioner was declared successful and a work order dated 28.07.2023 was issued in its favour, followed by execution of a formal agreement on the same date. It is the case of the petitioner that although the stipulated period for completion of the work was eight months, the work could not be commenced immediately due to non-availability of the site on account of standing trees and the requirement of statutory permissions for their removal. Necessary permission for tree cutting was granted only on 06.10.2023, followed by further procedural compliance by the Forest Department. It is contended that the delay in commencement of work was entirely beyond the control of the petitioner and attributable to the respondent authorities. After the site was cleared, the petitioner mobilized resources and commenced the work diligently, completing approximately 30% of the project. During execution, the petitioner submitted a running bill of about ₹7.20 lakhs, which was duly measured, verified and forwarded for payment on 13.06.2025. However, despite such verification, the respondents have failed to release the said admitted amount. It is further submitted that the petitioner has executed additional work worth approximately ₹25 lakhs, but the respondents have not carried out the mandatory measurement and recording in the Measurement Book, thereby preventing submission of further bills and causing serious financial hardship to the petitioner. Hence this petition.

4 Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

5 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of respondent No. 2 in withholding the admitted running bill of approximately ₹7.20 lakhs, despite the same having been duly measured, verified and forwarded for payment, is ex facie arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is contended that no objection or deficiency has been communicated regarding the work executed. It is further submitted that once the bill was processed after due verification, a