Mohd. Ashraf vs Ut Of J&K & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 1431 j&K

                                                                     Sr.No. 143


              HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                            AT JAMMU


                                                 WP(C) No. 2186/2022
                                                 CM No. 5910/2022

Mohd. Ashraf                                         ....Petitioner/Appellant(s)

                   Through :- Mr. Sheikh Najeeb, Advocate.

        V/s

UT of J&K & ors.                                             ....Respondent(s)


                   Through :- Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG.
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE

                                 ORDER

14.10.2022

1. The petitioner has approached this Court, after six long years of

inaction, with his alleged claim for realization of payment for the

contract work alleged to have been executed by him concerning the

Department of PMGSY, Division Doda. The basis for the petitioner

to come forward with the present writ petition is a purported

communication dated 10.02.2022 issued by the Executive Engineer,

PMGSY, Division Doda to the District Development Commissioner,

Doda in terms whereof the Executive Engineer, PMGSY, Division

Doda in terms of the contents of the communication, without

referring to any order of allotment of the contract work, the duration

of the contract work, the completion of the contract work and the

nature of the contract work alleged to have been undertaken by the

petitioner, requested the District Development Commissioner, Doda

for the release of funds to the amount of Rs. 12, 60,008/-.

CM No. 5910/2022

2. The basis for addressing this communication is to be assumed known

only to the Executive Engineer, PMGSY Division Doda who has

authored this letter of reference in favour of the petitioner. This

Court is not in a position to speculate as to what was, if any, the

response of the District Development Commissioner, Doda to the

communication dated 10.02.2022 of the Executive Engineer, PMGSY

Division, Doda but on the basis of the fact that since 10.02.2022, the

release of alleged recommended amount of Rs. 12, 60,008/- is not

taking place in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner addressed a

legal notice dated 19.05.2022 to the Chief Engineer, PMGSY,

District Development Commissioner, Doda and the Executive

Engineer, PMGSY Division, Doda wherein a reference to the alleged

allotted work so done by the petitioner out of which the claim for

payment of Rs. 12, 60,008/- has been made for the year February-

March, 2016 without reference to any allotment order.

3. The period allowed by the petitioner to go by in approaching this

Court with present writ petition is unexplained and as such mere

service of a legal notice in the month of May, 2022 to the addresses

as named in the legal notice dated 19.05.2022 would not carve out a

basis for the petitioner to lay a present writ petition under Article 226

of the Constitution of India.

4. The Executive Engineer, PMGSY Division Doda seems to again at

work to provide basis for the petitioner's claim when the said

Executive Engineer addresses communication no. PMGSY/D/1153-

56 dated 17.06.2022 to the petitioner's counsel acknowledging

CM No. 5910/2022

verbatim the claim of the petitioner. It appears that the person

serving as Executive Engineer, PMGSY Division Doda is more keen

in securing the payment of public money taking place in favour of the

petitioner than the Actual Authorities concerned who are supposed to

deal with the matter of the nature as is the present one.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon two judgments of the

coordinate Bench of this Court in OWP no. 631/2012 decided on

02.03.2022 titled 'Abdul Hafiz Wani Vs. State of J&K and others'

and WP(C) No. 654/2021 decided on 21.05.2022 titled 'Amanullah

Khan vs. Union Territory of J&K and ors'. The said two judgments

relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner have no

relevance in the present case.

6. For the reasons mentioned above, the petition is found to be without

any merit is and accordingly dismissed along with connected

application(s).

(Rahul Bharti) Judge

JAMMU 14.10.2022 NARESH