Madhya Pradesh High Court
M/S. Rk Constructions A Parternship ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 June, 2025
1 WP-19918-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
WP No. 19918 of 2025
(M/S. RK CONSTRUCTIONS A PARTERNSHIP FIRM THROUGH ITS PARTNER MAYUR JHALLA Vs THE
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )
Dated : 05-06-2025
Shri Pradyumna Kibe - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Bhuwan Gautam - GA for the State.
IA No.5184/2025 is taken up, which is an application for urgent
hearing during summer vacation.
2. Considering the reasons assigned in the application IA
No.5184/2025 is allowed. The matter is taken up for hearing.
3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in identical case WP
No.19750/2025 (Ms. R.K. Constructions A Partnership Firm through its
Partner Mayur Jhalla Vs. The State of M.P. and others) in which notices
have been issued and Interim Order has been passed on 02.06.2025.
4. The aforesaid contention is not been disputed by counsel for the
State.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
completed the work and thereafter completion certificate was also issued to
the petitioner, however, on the basis of the audit report by order dated
09.05.2025 recovery has been initiated against the petitioner. Earlier also the
petitioner approached this Court by preferring Writ Petition which was
decided by order dated 31.01.2025 and petitioner was directed to approach to
the competent authority as per the terms of the general conditions of the
contract. Thereafter the petitioner approached to the competent authority,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJIT
KAMALASANAN
Signing time: 06-06-2025
13:29:44
2 WP-19918-2025
however the competent authority by impugned order dated 09.05.2025 has
rejected the objections raised by the petitioner and ordered to initiate the
recovery against the petitioner.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the
petitioner has already approached M.P. Arbitration Tribunal and filed a
reference case which is still pending and during the pendency of the
reference case no recovery can be initiated against the petitioner. He relied
on the judgment of Supreme Court delivered in the matter of Tulsinarayan
Garg V/s. M.P. Road Development Authority, Bhopal and Others 2022 (17)
SCC 750 wherein the Apex Court has held that pending the reference case no
recovery is permissible. He also relied on the interim order passed by the
Vacation Bench of Principal Bench, Jabalpur in W.P. No.19594/2025 on
29.05.2025 (M/s. Vishwa Kusum Infratech V/s. M.P. Rural Road
Development Authority and Others) whereby the recovery initiated against
similarly situated contractor was stayed by the coordinate Bench.
7. Issue notice.
8. The notice is accepted by learned Government Advocate Shri
Bhuwan Deshmukh on behalf of respondent No.1 on advance copy. Issue
notice to the respondents No.2 to 4 on payment of process fee by tomorrow.
Humdast notice be issued to the respondents in addition. The notices be
made returnable within two weeks.
9. Considering the judgment delivered by Supreme Court in the
matter of Tulsinarayan Garg (supra) and order dated 29.05.2025 passed by
the coordinate Bench no coercive action be taken against the petitioner till
3 WP-19918-2025
next date of hearing.
10. List the matter in the week commencing 16.06.2025 alongwith
WP No.19750/2025.
C.c. as per rules.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) (PAVAN KUMAR DWIVEDI)
V. JUDGE V. JUDGE
ajit
