52 +0530 Mayank Mishra S/o Shri Nand Kumar Mishra Aged About 33 Years R/o v. 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Public Health Engineering Ministry
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:41331-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4383 of 2025 MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.08.19 11:11:52 +0530 Mayank Mishra S/o Shri Nand Kumar Mishra Aged About 33 Years R/o B.D. Mahant Up Nagar, Ward No.6, Near Trilok Offset, Janjgir, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Public Health Engineering Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector Janjgir- Champa, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) 3 - Executive Engineer Public Health Engineering Department, Division Janjgir- Champa, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s)
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Vivek Mishra, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 18.08.2025 2 1. Heard Mr. Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General for respondents / State. 2. The petitioner has filed the present petition with the following prayers : “1] That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions and the respondent authorities may kindly be directed to make full payment to the petitioner for the work executed by him in pursuant to agreement no.525/ DL/2020-2021 & 526/ DL/2020-2021 along with 12% interest till the date of actual payment, in the interest of justice. 2] That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that as per the notification date 09/07/2020, after technical approval of estimate by the office of Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Section, under District Mineral Foundation (DMF), administrative approval is given for the improvement work of closed tap under water supply schemes from the amount received by District Mineral Foundation under the rules and conditions. The estimate amount approved for the village Tushar was Rs. 22.53 lakhs and for village Thatari was Rs. 7.98 lakhs. The petitioner was successfully granted the contract for maintenance and improvement of water pipes and facilitating the drinking water for two villages under the block 3 Jaijepur namely Tusar and Tathari for which the work order dated 18/01/2021 and agreement No. 525/DL/2020-21 & 526/DL/2020- 21 was executed respectively. Thereafter, as per the work order letter No. 372, the final amount of expenditure is Rs. 12.46 Lakhs x 9.80 % = 13,65,859/- and as per letter No. 374 the approximate amount of expenditure is Rs. 7,78,443/-, as per the final bill submitted by the petitioner in both the contract. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has executed the work as per work orders and therefore he has been provided the work completion report and completion certificate in both the work orders were also issued by the competent authority, however till date no amount has been paid to the petitioner. Further, the petitioner has completed the work assigned to him and has submitted the final bill on 23/05/2021 in agreement No. 525 DLJ 2020-2021, however till date no amount has been paid and the due amount for payment to petitioner is Rs. 13,65,859/-. In agreement No. 526 DLJ 2020-2021 the petitioner has completed the work on 30/04/2021 and final bill of Rs. 7,78,443/- was submitted on 05/05/2021 but till date no payment has been made and the total due amount for payment to petitioner is Rs. 21,44,302/-. The petitioner has made many requests and representation before the respondent authorities, though it is admitted by the Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Janjgir-Champa and a letter No. 1884/2022 was sent by the office of Executive Magistrate to the Collector, Sakti mentioning that the work of Band 4 Nal Jal Yojna has been completed but the payment process is pending due to lack of funds. The payment is till due to petitioner which is evident from the correspondence between respondent No. 3 Executive Engineer to respondent No.2 the Collector. Hence this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a small scale contractor and his entire income depends upon the payment made by the authorities for whom he executes the work as per work order. Therefore without proper and due payment for the work executed by him he and his family cannot survive. Further, in the instant case it not the dispute that the petitioner has not completed the work or there is any dissatisfaction or there is some lacuna in the work executed by the petitioner, so the amount towards the bill would be withheld. The petitioner has completed the work assigned to him as per the work order and in very satisfactory manner and therefore the respondent authorities have granted the work completion certificate in favor of the petitioner. The petitioner has approached the authorities on several occasions but the reason of non-payment of due amount is because of the lack of funds. The respondent authorities should make the payment of amount due to the petitioner along with interest, because the petitioner has been deprived from the payment of the work executed by for more than 3 years as of now. Further, reliance is placed upon a similar case passed by this Hon'ble High Court in WPC No. 1135/2023 "Gowardhan Banjare 5 V/s State of Chhatisgarh & Ors.” and also in the case of Popatrao Vyankatrao Patil v. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2020) 19 SCC 241. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that this petition is not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative remedy i.e. filing a civil suit, as the matter at hand is purely civil in nature, involving a dispute over payment for work executed under a contract. Given the contractual nature of the dispute and the absence of any alleged statutory or constitutional violations, the petitioner should pursue a civil suit for recovery of the alleged dues, allowing for a thorough examination of the contractual obligations and potential breaches. The civil courts are better equipped to handle such disputes, and writ petitions may not be the preferred route when an alternative remedy is available, unless exceptional circumstances are demonstrated. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with the petition. 7. From perusal of the materials available on record, it appears that the petitioner has performed some work for the respondent / State for which he has been granted completion certificate, however, the grievance of the petitoner is that the payment for thes aid work done is not being made. Essentially, the relationship between the parties is contractual in nature and such claims could be better 6 adjudicated by the competent jurisdictional Civil Court to which the petitoner has not taken recourse to. As such, this petition is dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail such remedy. 8. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Manpreet