Swayambhu Construction Pvt. ... vs State Of Maharashtra Through ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1236 Bom

12-WP-3078-21                                                              1/3


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                        WRIT PETITION NO.3078 OF 2021


Swayambhu Construction Pvt. Ltd.
Through Its Managing Director Shri
Abhay Madamwar, Yashwant Nagar,
Master Colony, Hinganghat,
Dist. Wardha                                             ... Petitioner

-vs-

1. State of Maharashtra,
   through Its Secretary, Public Works
   Department, Murzban Road,
   Opp. CST, Azad Maidan, Fort,
   Mumbai, Maharashtra 400 001.

2. Chief Secretary, Tribal Development
   Department, 1st Floor, Mantralaya,
   (Extension Building), Madam Cama Road,
   Hutatma Rajguru Chowk, Mumbai 32.

3. Superintendent Engineer,
   Public Works Department,
   Chandrapur.

4. Executive Engineer,
   Public Works Department,
   Wardha.

5. Chief Engineer,
   Public Works Regional Office,
   Nagpur                                                ... Respondents.


Shri K. N. Shukul, Advocate for petitioner.
Smt H. N. Jaipurkar, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents.

                         CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND SMT M. S. JAWALKAR, JJ.

DATE : February 03, 2022

Oral Judgment : ( Per: A. S. Chandurkar, J.)

Considering the nature of directions proposed to be issued, after 12-WP-3078-21 2/3

hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up

for disposal.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard learned counsel

for the parties.

2. The petitioner-Firm claims that it has undertaken work of

construction of road in Tahsil Samudrapur, District Wardha by virtue of

three separate Work Orders issued by the respondent No.4. On

completion of the aforesaid work, the petitioner claims to have submitted

its bills for release of amount towards the work done. The

communications dated 27/06/2019 issued by the respondent No.4 and

30/01/2020 issued by the respondent No.3 indicate that the work in

question hklas been completed. The bills submitted by the petitioner on

completion of the work are yet to be processed. Since there has been no

progress in the matter, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking

necessary reliefs.

3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents

initially sought time to file reply to the averments made in the writ

petition. Attention was however invited to the representation made by

the petitioner dated 13/07/2021 calling upon respondent Nos.2,3 and 4

to release the pending bills of the petitioner.

12-WP-3078-21 3/3

4. We find that the representation made by the petitioner to the

respondent Nos.2,3 and 4 on 13/07/2021 has not yet been responded to.

Since it is the case of the petitioner that the Work Order in question has

been completed to the satisfaction of the Authorities, it would be for the

said respondents to consider and decide the aforesaid representation

dated 13/07/2021.

5. In view of aforesaid, the respondent Nos.2,3 and 4 are directed to

take a decision on the petitioner's representation dated 13/07/2021

within a period of six weeks from the production of this order. The

decision taken shall be communicated to the petitioner. Needless to state

that if the grievance of the petitioner still remains un-redressed after such

decision, it is free to take such steps as are permissible in law. Keeping

the points raised in the writ petition open, the writ petition is disposed of.

Rule accordingly. No costs.

(Smt M. S. Jawalkar, J.) (A. S. Chandurkar, J.)

Asmita