IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.376 of 2022

======================================================

Krishna Mohan Prasad Vaidya, son of Mahendra Prasad Vaidya, resident of

Chakkadih, Police Station- Banka, District- Banka.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Building Construction

Department, Bishweshraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.

2.

The Engineer in Chief, Building Construction Department, Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Chief Engineer, Building Construction Department, Nirman Bhawan,

Bailey Road, Patna.

4.

The Superintending Engineer, Building Construction Circle, Bhagalpur.

5.

The District Magistrate, Banka.

6.

The Executive Engineer, Building Construction Division, Banka.

7.

The Assistant Engineer, Building Construction Division, Banka.

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr. Rajib Ranjan Jha, Advocate

For the Respondent/s

:

Mr. Syed Iqbal Ahmad, SC-20

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

=======================================================

(The proceedings of the Court are being conducted by

Hon’ble the Chief Justice/ Hon’ble Judges through

Video

Conferencing

from

their

residential

offices/residences. Also, the Advocates and the Staffs

joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing

from their residences/offices.)

=======================================================

Date : 18-02-2022

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-

Patna High Court CWJC No.376 of 2022 dt.18-02-2022

2/7

“For issuance of appropriate writ or writs, direction or

directions commanding the respondent to pay the

remaining dues of Rs.6,34,000/- for the work done by the

petitioner in pursuance of an agreement vide No. 4F2

2018-19 on 23.06.2018 with the respondent No.6 for

renovation work in the campus Development Footpath

main Gate and other works in the campus of Krishi Udyog

Pradarshani Kendra situated at Bounsi Mela in Bounsi

Block under the Banka District for which sanction letter

for Rs.1,06,43,163/- including the claim of the petitioner

has already been issued and or issuance of any other

consequential writ or writs to pay the statutory as well as

Penal interest thereon.”

The present petition stands filed for a direction to the

respondents to pay the dues alleged to be admitted.

We find that scores of petitions are filed before this

Court, of similar nature, whereby a vested right is alleged to

have been accrued in favour of the petitioners for payment of

dues allegedly admitted by the respondents.

The present petition, in our considered view is totally

misconceived, both on facts and law. What are admitted dues?

what is an admission? and what are the circumstances under

which a Court can issue a writ of mandamus directing the State

to release the amount as payment due and admissible, which is

undisputed, in fact admitted for carrying out works of civil

nature, is now well settled.

Patna High Court CWJC No.376 of 2022 dt.18-02-2022

3/7

The Executive Engineer is not the competent

authority under the agreement to make the admissions. He has

only recommended the bills of the petitioner to the superior

authority or the authority under the contract to take a decision

for clearing the bills and release the payment.

There is no unequivocal admission on the part of the State

admitting the work executed by the petitioner or the amount

payable to him.

Petitioner can take recourse to the remedies, equally

efficacious, stipulated under the agreement and the relevant

applicable statutes.

The recent decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in

Phoenix ARC Private Limited versus Vishwa Bharati Vidya

Mandir & Ors. (Civil