Kundan Singh Bhandari vs Union Of India And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 3054 UK

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

           THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI VIPIN SANGHI
                          AND
          JUSTICE SHRI RAMESH CHANDRA KHULBE
                          21st SEPTEMBER, 2022
                           Special Appeal No.196 of 2022
Kundan Singh Bhandari                                       ......Appellant
                                      Vs.

Union of India and others                                ......Respondents


Presence:-
Mr. D.K. Joshi, learned counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Atul Bahuguna, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

JUDGMENT: (Per Shri Vipin Sanghi, Chief Justice)

Delay Condonation Application (IA/1/22)
              In view of the grounds stated in the application and
considering the fact that the learned counsel for the respondent, fairly,
does not oppose the application, the application is allowed and the
delay of 37 days in filing the present special appeal is condoned.

SPA No.196 of 2022

2.            This present special appeal is directed against the order
dated 21.04.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in WPMS No.
729 of 2022. The writ petition, preferred by the appellant to seek a
mandamus to the respondents to make full and final payment to the
appellant against the bills raised by the petitioner for the period from
21.08.2020 to 10.09.2020, has been rejected by the learned Single
Judge by observing that under as per Clause-5 of the contractual terms,
in an event of dispute pertaining to the claim with regard to the work
performed under the contract, the aggrieved party would have to
approach the District Judgeship of District Champawat.

3.            The learned Single Judge has observed that the writ
petition entails consideration of factual aspects pertaining to the relief
claimed by the petitioner, and consequently, the petition has been
 dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to ventilate his grievance
before the concerned district Court.

4.               The submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that
in respect of another contract, the learned Single Judge had entertained
the writ petition in WPMS No.730 of 2022, on the same day.

5.               By the said order dated 21.04.2022 passed in WPMS No.
730 of 2022, the respondents were called for to file their counter
affidavit(s). A copy of that order has been placed on record. We have
perused the same. A perusal of the said order shows that the Court
entertained the writ petition in respect of bills, which had already been
sanctioned by the respondents. Consequently, there was no outstanding
dispute in relation to Bill Nos.37 and 38. It is for this reason that the
said writ petition was entertained. However, that cannot be said about
the contract in question, since the respondents are disputing the claim
made by the petitioner/appellant.

6.               We, therefore, do not find any merit in the present appeal
and the same is dismissed with liberty to the appellant to avail the civil
remedy available to him before the concerned district court.



                                                       ________________
                                                     VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.

                                          ________________________
                                     RAMESH CHANDRA KHULBE, J.

Dated: 21st September, 2022 BS/SK