Serial No. 36
Regular Cause List
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 2236/2022
CM(5612/2022)
Manzoor Ahmad Sofi Petitioner(s)
…
Through: Mr. Adil Asimi, Advocate
Vs.
Union Territory of J&K and Ors. ...Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Mubashir Majid Malik, Dy. AG
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE
SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE.
ORDER
31.12.2024
1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking a direction
upon the respondents to release an amount of Rs. 15,11,965/- along with
interest in his favour. The petitioner claims to be a contractor who was
awarded the execution of construction work viz. “construction of link road
nd
BWO Earth filling GSB and WBM G 2 upto to H/O Fh Mohammad Koul at
-18 dated
Qammerabad, Qamarwari”, vide allotment order No. 22413
04.08.2015.
2. The petitioner has submitted that he executed the aforesaid work
incurring a cost of Rs. 27,23,965/- out of which he has been paid an amount
of Rs. 12,12,000/- leaving a balance of Rs. 15,11,965/- with the respondents.
He asserts that the work was executed to the entire satisfaction of the
respondents and till date the balance amount of Rs. 15,11,965/- has not been
paid to the petitioner.
3. According to the petitioner, a legal notice dated 27.05.2022,
came to be served by him upon the respondents, but inspite of the same, the
Page 1 of 3 WP(C) 2236/2022
respondents have not cleared the liability. Hence the present writ petition has
been filed.
4. The respondents have filed reply to the writ petition, in which
they have submitted that the work in question was allotted to the petitioner
vide allotment order dated 04.08.2015 for a sum of Rs. 1,50,473/-. It has been
submitted that the petitioner executed the additional work to the tune of Rs.
27,23,965/- out of which an amount of Rs. 12,12,000/- stands paid to him,
thus leaving a balance amount of Rs. 15,11,965/-. It has been further
submitted that the aforesaid amount has been reflected in the liability
statement, which has been submitted to the higher authorities. It has been
submitted that the petitioner has been informed that the balance amount will
be released in favour of the petitioner after completion of all the necessary
codal formalities and when the funds are made available and placed at the
disposal of the answering respondent.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material on record.
6. From the objections filed by the respondents, it is clear that the
respondents have not disputed the allotment of work to the petitioner nor have
they disputed the fact that work has been executed by the petitioner to the
entire satisfaction of the respondent authorities. It has been admitted by the
respondents that the petitioner has executed the work to the tune of Rs.
27,23,965/-, out of which an amount of Rs. 12,12,000/- stands released in his
favour, leaving an outstanding amount of Rs. 15,11,965/-. According to the
respondents, the balance outstanding amount is reflected in their liability
statement and that the same would be released in favour of the petitioner after
completion of codal formalities and availability of funds.
Page 2 of 3 WP(C) 2236/2022
7. The stand taken by the respondents for not releasing the funds to
the petitioner appears to be unjustified because the respondents have after
allocating the work to the petitioner allowed him to execute the work without
insisting upon completion of codal formalities. By their conduct, the
respondents have made the petitioner to mobilize men and machinery and to
incur huge expenditure on the work allotted in his favour. By asking the
petitioner to change his position to his disadvantage, the respondents have
given rise to the legitimate expectation in favour of the petitioner that he
would be paid for the work which he has executed.
8. Thus the respondents have made themselves liable to
compensate the petitioner for the expenses which he had incurred in
competition of the work. The availability of funds are internal matters of
official respondents and the petitioner cannot be denied his dues on account
of administrative issues which the respondents may be facing in releasing the
funds in his favour.
9. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed and the
respondents are directed to release the balance amount of Rs. 15,11,965/- in
favour of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date a copy of
this order is made available by the petitioner to the respondents. In case the
balance amount is not released in favour of the petitioner within the aforesaid
period the same shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing
of writ petition till its realization.
10. Disposed of.
(SANJAY DHAR)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR:
31.12.2024
MIR ARIF
“ ”
MIR ARIF MANZOOR
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
02.01.2025
Page 3 of 3 WP(C) 2236/2022