IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.796 of 2009
In
(CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE 7712/2008)
01. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Water
Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
02. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Dehri
(Rohtas)
03. The Superintending Engineer, Durgawati Circle, Bhitari
Bandh, Chenari, District- Rohtas (Sasaram)
04. The Executive Engineer, Durgawati Right Side Canal
Division, Chenari Rohtas (Sasaram)
05. The Deputy Director, Quality Control Division, Dehri
(Rohtas)
..... Respondents-Appellants
Versus
M/S Komal Construction, Chhawani, Mohalla Ward No.1
Bhabhua (kaimur) through its partner Komal Singh son of
Late Bachnu Singh, Ward No.1 (Chhawani Mohalla)
Bhabhua District- Kaimur
..... Petitioner- Respondent
For the Appellants:- Mr. Piyush Lall, AC to AAG-1
For the Respondent:- Mr. Mrigank Mauli, Advocate
----------------------------------
06. 02.08.2011 The matter arises out of the dispute
between the appellant State and the respondent-
contractor with regard to levy amount of Rs.
15,41,119/- vide Memo No. 430 dated 4.10.2007
(Annexure-17 to the writ petition) issued by the
Executive Engineer, Durgawati Right Side Canal
Division, whereby the respondent has been asked to
refund the amount alleged to have been excess paid
following the direction of this Court in C.W.J.C.
No.7309 of 2006.
2
The main contention on behalf of the State
Mr. Piyush Lall is that there was a dispute with
regard to execution of the work by respondent-
contractor and also with regard to the quality of the
soil, whether it is soft and hard. As the disputed
question of facts have been involved in this case the
respondent has to approach the concerned Tribunal
under the Bihar Public Works Contract Dispute
Tribunal Act, 2008.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondent submits that in view of the order passed
by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 7309 of 2006 a
representation has been made on the question of
demand. Accordingly the said representation was
disposed of. This Court is of the opinion that there
are disputed question of fact which has to be
decided by an individual Forum as this Court is not
an appropriate Forum under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India to go into the disputed
question of facts.
Under the aforesaid circumstances it
would suffice if the appellant State is directed to
approach the Tribunal under the provision of the Act
indicating facts of its case and the Tribunal shall
dispose of the same in accordance with law. Liberty
3
is also granted to respondent contractor to contest
the matter before the Tribunal by filing an
appropriate reply. It is also made clear that Tribunal
shall dispose of the matter as per the law and till the
order is passed by the Tribunal no coercive steps
shall be taken against the respondent herein.
With the above observation the L.P.A.
stands disposed of.
(T. Meena Kumari, J.)
(Vikash Jain, J.)
P.K.