High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

M/S A-One Builders vs State Of Punjab And Another on 12 February, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S A-One Builders vs State Of Punjab And Another on 12 February, 2009
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                  CHANDIGARH


                                 C.W.P NO. 2207 OF 2009
                                 DECIDED ON : 12.02.2009


M/S A-One Builders
                                             ...Petitioner
           versus

State of Punjab and another
                                             ...Respondents



CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT



Present : Mr. Vinod Gupta, Advocate,
          for the petitioner.



SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)

Notice of motion.

Mr. G. S. Attariwala, Additional AG, Punjab, accepts

notice.

The petitioner-company seeks a mandamus directing

the respondents to release the payment of Rs.2,32,246/- along

with interest for the work executed by it.

The petitioner-company is stated to have executed

some work allotted to it by the respondents, within the stipulated

period and to the satisfaction of the authorities. The final bill was

also prepared and the same was also entered in the Measurement

Book. However, the due payment is not being released to the

petitioner, despite a legal notice dated 12.06.2008 (Annexure

P-4) served upon the respondents.

C.W.P NO. 2207 OF 2009 -2-

It appears that the petitioner-company is entitled to

be paid certain dues on account of the work executed by it. The

said payment, however, is not being released for one or the other

administrative reasons.

In these circumstances, I am of the considered view

that whatever amount the petitioner has been found entitled to

by the respondents, there is no justification to withhold the same.

Consequently, this writ petition is disposed of with a

direction to the respondents to settle the petitioner’s account and

whatever is found due, release the same within a period of two

months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

As regards the petitioner’s claim for interest, the same

cannot be effectively decided in these proceedings and the

petitioner would be at liberty to recover the same, if so

admissible, as per law.

Disposed of.

FEBRUARY 12, 2009                           (SURYA KANT)
shalini                                         JUDGE