Shri S. Gopeshwor Singh vs The State Of Manipur Represented ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 318 Mani

         Digitally signed by ABUJAM SURJIT


ABUJAM   SINGH
         DN: c=IN, o=High court of manipur,
         ou=HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR,
         pseudonym=0e1b0ee3b6ffbed0d8


SURJIT
         36a65b3c7514b4d7f927b15a538b
         5057a961df2de21ab9,
         postalCode=795002, st=MANIPUR,
         serialNumber=1e700e5572d1584e
                                                                                      Item No.18( through V.C)
SINGH
         2ef9ded940fdfcda461fb9f5fb09afe
         579b80bd60dcc588f, cn=ABUJAM
         SURJIT SINGH
         Date: 2021.12.06 12:59:20 +05'30'        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
                                                            AT IMPHAL
                                                       W.P. (C) No. 474 of 2020

                Shri S. Gopeshwor Singh, aged about 67 years S/o (L) S/
                Modhuchandra Singh, a resident of Singjamei Waikhom Leikai, P.O. &
                P.S. Singjamei, Imphal West District, Manipur-795001.
                                                                                              ... Petitioner
                                                                   - Versus -

              1. The     State    of   Manipur    represented      by   the   Principal
                 Secretary/Commissioner, Public Health Engineering New Secretariat
                 Building, P. O/P.S, Imphal, Imphal West District, Manipur-795001
              2. The Principal Secretary/Addl. Chief Secretary(Finance), Government
                 of Manipur, New Secretariat Building, P. O/P. S. Imphal, Imphal West
                 District, Manipur-795001.
              3. The                     Chief   Engineer,    Public   Health   Engineering    Department,
                       Government of Manipur,Khoyathong, P. O/P.S. Imphal, Imphal West
                       District, Manipur-795001.
              4. The Executive Engineering, ,Chandel P. H. E.          Division, PHE
                 Department, P. O. & P. S. Chandel, Chandel District, Manipur-795127
                                                                                          ... Respondents

B E F O R E HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHANTHEM BIMOL SINGH For the petitioner : Mr. L. Raju, Advocate For the respondents : Mr.K. Jagat Singh, GA Date of Hearing : 03.12.2021 Date of Judgment & Order : 03.12.2021

JUDGMENT &ORDER

Heard Mr. L. Raju, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and

Mr. K. Jagat, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

[1]. The present writ petition has been filed with a prayer for directing the

respondents to pay to the petitioner the bill amounting to Rs.20,89,886/-

(Rupees twenty lakheighty-nine thousand eight hundred eighty six ) only

within a stipulated period with 6% (six percent) interest per annum from the

date of supply of the materials.

[2]. The case of the petitioner is that as approved by the Chief Engineer,

PHED, the Executive Engineer, PHED, Chandel Division issued 5(five)

supplied orders to the petitioner, vide supplied/ work orders No.(1).

EE/PHED/AC-2/2013-14/69 dated 21.10.2013, (2) EE/PHED/AC-2/2013-

2014/68 dated 10.10.2013, (3) EE/CDL/PHE/AC-2/2015-2016/16 dated

27.04.2015, (4) EE/CDL/PHE/AC-02/2015-16/15 dated 27.04.2015 and (5)

EE/CDL/PHE AC-2 2015-16 dated 27.04.2015.

[3]. According to the petitioner, he had supplied all the materials indicated

in supply order to the PHED, Chandel Division on 30.10.2013,15.05.2015,

25.05.2015 and 22.05.2015 respectively and thereafter, the petitioner

submitted the bills to the Executive Engineer, Chandel PHE, Chnadel Division

altogether amounting to Rs. 20,89,886/- (Rupees twenty lakh, eighty-nine

thousand eight hundred and eighty six) only. The case of the petitioner is that

at the time of receiving the said bills, the concerned Executive Engineer and

Assistant Engineer of Chandel Division put their signatures on the back side

of the bills acknowledging/ receiving of the materials in full and in good quality

conditions as per the specification.

When the concerned authoritiesfailed to release or pay the bills to the

petitioner even after execution of the contract works and after submission of

the bills, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present writ petition

with the prayer as stated hereinabove.

[4]. It has been submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the

respondentsreleased or cleared the billsin respect of other contract works

which were executed by other contractors long after the execution of the

contract works by the petitioner while refusing to release the bills of the

petitioner without any reasons and thereby the respondents have acted

arbitrarily and discriminatorily in the matter of releasing of the bills for

executing the contract works issued by the respondents.

[5]. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents No.1 and 3, it has

been stated that the financial / budget system is yearly basis and works have

to be executed as per the yearly approved work programme and within the

allocated budget of that particular year. It has also been stated that funds are

released as per approved budget on yearly basis and the department had

already released the full amount against the budget provision of the relevant

years of the Chandel Division to the division concerned and that the

responsibility of the payment of any outstanding bills owed to the petitioner, if

any, for the alleged completed works lies with the Executive Engineer, PHE,

Chandel Division.

[6]. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.4, the Executive

Engineer, Chandel Division, it has been stated that no documents are

available in the office of the respondent No.4 relating to the supply work

orders and the bills as claimed by the petitioner and that the claim of the

petitioner is baseless and false and accordingly the present writ petition

deserves to be dismissed.

[7]. In the rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioner in reply to the affidavit-

in-opposition filed by the respondent No.4, it has been stated that during the

bifurcation of the Chandel district into two districts as Chandel District and

Tengnoupal District, the then Assistant Engineer intimated the petitioner to

come to the office to collect the original copies of the measurement books

and related bills and brochures, as there was a lot of confusion created due to

bifurcation of the Chandel district into two separate districts and that the

original documents were handed over to the petitioner by the then cashier of

the PHED, Chandel Division, namely, Thokchom Roben, who is now posted

at PHED, Imphal West.

In the said rejoinder affidavit, it has also been stated that during the

pendency of the present petition, the petitioner approached the concerned

Executive Officer and apprised about the availability of the original documents

and requested him for receiving the original documents relating to the

aforesaid supplied work orders executed by the petitioner. However, the

Executive Engineer was reluctant to receive the said original documents.

[8]. Mr. L. Raju, learned counsel for petitioner, by referring to the order

dated 20.9.2021 passed by this Court in W.P. (C) No. 492 of 2020, submitted

that in a similar case like the present one, this Hon'ble Court passed the

aforesaid order directing the petitioner therein to submit the copies of the

original document which were handed-over to him by the then cashier, PHED,

Chandel District, within a period of 2(two) weeks to the Principal

Secretary/Commissioner, PHED, Government of Manipur and that in the

event of submission of such documents by the petitioner, the respondent No.1

shall consider the same and issue a speaking order in respect thereof.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present writ

petition can be disposed of by issuing similar direction given by this Court in

its order dated 20.09.2020 passed in W.P. (C) No. 492 of 2020. Mr. K. Jagat,

learned Government Advocate fairly submitted that the present petition can

be disposed of by issuing similar directions as are given by this Court in the

order dated 20.09.2021 passed in W.P. (C) No. 492 of 2020.

[9]. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for

the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition

can be disposed of by issuing similar directions given by this Court in its order

dated 20.09.2021 in W.P. (C) No.492 of 2020. Accordingly, it is hereby

directed that petitioner should submit the relevant original documents in

connection with the contract works executed by him to the Principal

Secretary/Commissioner, PHED within a period of 2(two) weeks from today

and in the event of submission of such original documents by the petitioner

within the stipulated period, the Principal Secretary/Commissioner, PHED,

Government of Manipur, should consider the claim of the petitioner and issue

a speaking order in respect thereof within a period of 2(two) months from the

date of receipt of the original document.

With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of.

JUDGE

Ab.Surjit