2026:CGHC:21075-DB Digitally signed by SAGRIKA SAGRIKA AGRAWAL AGRAWAL Date: NAFR

2026.05.08

18:14:53 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2260 of 2026 M/s Landmark Engineer Through - Proprietor Mr. Nishant Jain S/o Suresh Chand Jain S/o Suresh Chand Jain Age- 46 Year R/o Shanti Nagar Ring Road No.2 District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary Department Of Mineral Resources Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 2 - Collector Mining Division District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh

3 - Chhattisgarh Rural Road Development Agency Through Chief Executive Officer Civil Lines Raipur Chhattisgarh, 4 - Executive Engineer C G R R D A - Piu Mungeli, District- Mungeli-

Chhattisgarh, 5 - Chief Engineer Cgrrda Civil Lines Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Shukla, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shashank Thakur, A.A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

06/05/2026

1. Heard Mr. Siddharth Shukla,, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Addl. Advocate General, appearing for Respondent/State.

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

“i. To Set-Aside and Quash the Letter No.12/Mining 03/2020 dated 6th January 2020, issued by Respondent No.2 being without any authority of law.

ii. To direct the Respondent No. 3 to 5 to release the withheld amount of Royalty of Rs. 3.11 Crore Approx in respect of Package No-G 27-134 by overriding the Letter No.12/Mining 03/2020 dated 6th January 2020, issued by Respondent No.2 in alternative.

iii. Pass any other relief order or direction, as this Hon'ble Court dees fit and proper looking to the facts and circumstance of the case and in the interest of justice.”

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the Petitioner is a sole proprietorship, engaged in road construction, was awarded a Work Order dated 04.05.2020 under PMGSY for construction and maintenance of roads in District Mungeli, which was duly completed despite COVID-19 disruptions, and a Completion Certificate dated 02.01.2023 was issued. Although the Petitioner had procured minor minerals upon payment of royalty, complete documentation could not be maintained due to the pandemic. At the stage of clearing the final (16th) bill, an amount of approximately Rs. 3.11 Crore was withheld by the Respondents solely on the ground of non-submission of a Royalty Clearance Certificate, relying upon a Letter dated 06.01.2020 issued by Respondent No. 2. The said condition, however, is neither part of the Tender Document-cum-Agreement nor supported by any statutory provision, and the withholding is not attributable to any defect in the work executed. Despite representations submitted by the Petitioner, the Respondents have failed to release the legitimate dues, giving rise to the present dispute.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the impugned action of the Respondents in withholding an amount of Rs. 3.11 Crore from the Petitioner’s legitimate dues is wholly illegal, arbitrary, and without authority of law, being based solely on Letter dated 06.01.2020, which is merely an executive instruction lacking any statutory backing. It is submitted that such executive instructions cannot override or supplement the binding terms of the Tender Document-cum- Agreement, which exclusively governs the contractual relationship between the parties and does not provide for withholding of payments on account of non-submission of a Royalty Clearance Certificate. The Respondents, being State instrumentalities, are bound to act strictly within the four corners of the contract and cannot impose additional conditions dehors the agreement. The impugned action is further violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, being manifestly arbitrary an