Haji Ali Mohammad Lone vs Union Territory Of Jk & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1648 j&K/2

                                                                            S. No. 17
                                                                            Regular Cause List
                      IN THE HIGH C0URT 0F JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                                         AT SRINAGAR
                                           WP (C) No. 1778/2020
               Haji Ali Mohammad Lone                                           ...Petitioner(s)

               Through: Mr Firdous Ahmad Bhat, Adv.

                                                     Vs.
               Union Territory of JK & Ors.                                    ...Respondent(s)

               Through: Mr. Hakim Aman Ali, Dy. AG
               CORAM:
                                 HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
                                                ORDER

21.12.2021

1. The short grievance projected by the petitioner in this petition is that he is a contractor by profession and was allotted the work of execution of balance civil works at receiving station Magam Handwara vide allotment No. STDS/2834-36 dated 9th October 2013. The petitioner submits that he completed the said work to the satisfaction of the respondents and raised the bill of Rs. 7,44,000/- out of which the respondent No. 5 released an amount of Rs. 2.30 lacs. Rest of the amount i.e., 5,14000/- is still outstanding. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that once there is no dispute with regard to the execution of the work and the amount payable to the petitioner is admitted by the respondents, there should be no reason or justification with respondents to deny the said legitimate payment of the petitioner.

2. Mr. Hakim Aman Ali, learned Dy. AG however submits that though the liability to the tune of Rs. 5,14000/- towards the petitioner is not disputed, yet respondent No. 5 could not make the payment due to non- availability of funds. It is submitted that respondent No. 5 has taken up the matter with higher ups for release of funds, but he has not received any positive response so far.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records, I am of the considered view that respondents more particularly respondent No. 5, who had got the work in question executed, have admitted their liability towards the petitioner, therefore, the respondents MOHAMMAD ALTAF NIMA 2021.12.22 11:59 WP I attest to the (C) and

integrity of this document have no reason or justification to deny the admitted payment of Rs. 5,14000/- to the petitioner. It may be noted that the work in question was executed and completed on 28th June 2013 and the running bills for the work were submitted to the respondents from time to time. As is admitted by respondent No. 5, an amount of Rs. 2.30 lacs only was released in favour of the petitioner, whereas, the remaining amount of Rs. 5,14000/- could not be released due to non-availability of funds. The only excuse put forth by respondent No. 5 is that he has taken up the matter with the higher ups for release of funds so that the remaining liability towards the petitioner is discharged, but he has not been favoured with requisite funds by the higher ups.

4. Be that as it may, once the respondent No. 5 or for that matter, any other respondent has got the work executed by the petitioner who has not only invested his labour and time, but money as well, he cannot be denied the fruits of his investment. The amount of Rs. 5,14000/- was thus payable to the petitioner immediately on successful execution of the work and any delay on the part of the respondents to disburse the said admitted amount would entail imposition of interest.

5. In view of the admitted position obtaining in the matter, this petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5,14000/- (admitted liability) to the petitioner for execution of the civil works at receiving station Magam Handwara along-with interest @ 6% per annum from the date the said amount has become payable. Let the aforesaid amount along-with interest be disbursed to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date a copy of this judgment along-with a copy of paper book is served on the respondents. It is made clear that in case the aforesaid amount is not paid to the petitioner within the stipulated period as above, the amount shall attract interest @9% after the completion of two months' period given herein above.

6. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

(SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE SRINAGAR 21.12.2021 Altaf

MOHAMMAD ALTAF NIMA 2021.12.22 11:59 WP I attest to the (C) and

integrity of this document