-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH *** 258 CWP-32550-2025 Date of Decision: 27.04.2026 SATPAL SINGH …Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Vishal Mehta, Advocate for petitioner Mr. Arun Jindal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondent to release payment with respect to work carried out by him for the respondent along with interest @ 18% per annum. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that payment qua work done by him stands admitted by the respondent. He further submits that respondent may be subjected to interest @ 18% per annum from the date of passing bills. 3. Learned State counsel submits that amount claimed by petitioner is disputed amount, thus, writ petition is not a proper remedy and petitioner should be relegated to arbitration as provided in the contract. SUDEEPAK KUMAR 2026.04.27 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -2- 4. In the wake of statement of both sides, the petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondent to release admitted payment to the petitioner within three months from today. If admitted payment is not released within aforesaid period, the respondent would be liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum from the expiry of said period. The petitioner is at liberty to approach appropriate authority qua disputed amount, if any. 5. Pending Misc. application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 27.04.2026 SDK Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No SUDEEPAK KUMAR 2026.04.27 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document