Allahabad High Court
M/S Krishna Associates ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 16 February, 2023
Bench: Sangeeta Chandra, Manish Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 2
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1240 of 2023
Petitioner :- M/S Krishna Associates Proprietorship Firm, Basti Thru. Sole Proprietor Shri Vinay Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Energy) Govt. Lko. And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kishor Pandey,Tanveer Ahmad Lari
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Puneet Chandra
Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Puneet Chandra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 2 to 4.
This petition has been filed with the following main prayers:-
" i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay the admitted due amount i.e. 2,38,29,762 (Two Crore Thirty Eight Lakhs Twenty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty Two Rupees) to the petitioner under the Contract dated 08.03.2019 within the stipulated time frame.
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay the interest @ 12% per annum on delayed withheld amount.
iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to restraining the respondents from excluding the petitioner from the eligibility criteria in any future contracts, solely on the ground of filing the present writ petition."
It is the case of the petitioner that he was engaged to do certain works by the respondent nos. 2 to 4, which is a Public Sector Undertaking of the Government of U.P. in pursuance of e-Tender Notice published on 01.11.2018. The contract was entered into between the parties on 08.03.2019 for civil construction for a total amount of Rs. 11.46 Crore (Eleven Crores Forty Six Lakhs). The petitioner completed the work within the stipulated time as given by the Executive Engineer concerned and he also given him Experience Certificate. The petitioner's bills, however, have been paid partly. The petitioner filed an application under Right to Information Act, 2005 on 07.09.2022 praying for information regarding bills of the petitioner remaining pending. He has received information through Public Information Officer dated 07.10.2022 to the effect that the total amount of Rs. 2,38,29,762 (Two Crores Thirty Eight Lakhs Twenty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty Two Rupees only) remains to be paid.
The counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance in the judgment passed by a coordinate bench of this Court in Writ C No. 10 of 2022 (M/s U.S. Trading Company Vs. State of U.P. and others), dated 06.01.2022, where the Court considered the objection raised by the counsel for the respondents regarding remedy of arbitration being available to the petitioner. Relevant extract of the order dated 06.01.2022 passed in M/s U.S. Trading Company (supra) is quoted hereinbelow:-
"Regarding the objection that the petitioner be relegated to the remedy which may be available to it by invoking arbitration clause, we may observe that prima facie what we find is that there does not appear to any dispute at the end of the Nagar Nigam, which is apparent from page 22 of the writ petition. This document appears to have been prepared by the authorities of Nagar Nigam wherein it has been clearly indicated that the petitioner- firm has executed the work allotted to it satisfactorily and even the matter has been approved up to the level of Nagar Aayukt for making payment. It is true that ordinarily a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in respect of prayers made for payment of money etc. would not be maintainable and in such a situation the petitioners are better advised either to invoke the arbitration clause if the same exists in the agreement or to take recourse to ordinarily civil remedies, however, in view the recent judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 2610 of 2019 (M/s Surya Constructions Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.), petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can also be filed."
Shri Puneet Chandra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents nos. 2 to 4 on the basis of instructions received says that the petitioner has not submitted tax invoices and has not completed certain formalities, therefore, his bills were remained unpaid.
This petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to complete all the formalities within three weeks from today and the respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate order regarding release of due payment to the petitioner within a further period of two months.
Order Date :- 16.2.2023/Ashish
