If the respondents were short of funds, they should not have gone ahead with the allotment of work and withheld the payment of the petitioner. The inaction on the part of respondents has definitely caused a lot of harassment and inconvenience to the petitioner. Such an attitude on the part of Government functionaries cannot be countenanced. The petitioner cannot be made to wait for years together for his legitimate dues. The aforesaid has been considered by the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh while adjudicating the case of M/S AL-Qaimoon Constructions v. Commr/Secretary & Ors. [ WP(C) No.1754/2021 CM No.5840/2021] which was decided upon by the single judge bench comprising Justice Sanjay Dhar on 10th November 2021.
The facts of the case are as follows. It is averred in the petition that in response to NIT through etendering process, the petitioner offered its bids and thereafter, the work for construction of 0.75 lac Gallons RCC dome type clear water sump for water supply scheme, Shoul Sarsona was allotted in favour of the petitioner. The cost of the work was Rs37.11 lacs. It is further averred that after the allotment of work was executed by respondents in favour of the petitioner whereafter the petitioner started execution of the work by mobilizing men and machinery. It is further averred that after successful completion of the allotted work, the same was checked and measured by the respondents and a bill in the amount of Rs.28,76,000/ was raised by the petitioner before respondent No.5. After verification and authentication of this bill, net amount of Rs.24,37,410/ was found payable in favour of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, this amount has remained unpaid though the same is not being disputed by the respondents.
The court perused the facts and arguments presented. It was of the opinion that “ it is a case of admitted liability by the respondents. The respondents are directed to pay an amount of Rs.24,37,410/ (Rupees twenty-four lacs thirty-seven thousand and four hundred ten only) to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of this order. The petitioner shall also be entitled to interest @6% from the date of filing of this petition till realization of aforesaid amount.”
Judgment reviewed by Aryan Bajaj