2025:JHHC:20257 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.2430 of 2025 ----- Shambhu Sharan Sudhanshu, S/o Late Jai Kishun Prasad, resident of Kailash Nagar, P.O. & P.S. Chas, District Bokaro. .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 3. The Additional Municipal Commissioner, Chas Municipal Corporation, ITI More, Chas, Bokaro. 4. The Assistant Municipal Commissioner, Chas Municipal Corporation, ITI More, Chas, Bokaro. .......... Respondents. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ravi Prakash Mishra, AC to AAG-II For Res. Nos.3 & 4 : Mr. Anup Kr. Agarwal, Advocate ----- Order No.02 Date: 24.07.2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent no.3 to make payment of Rs.4,48,410.93 to the petitioner towards the work executed by him as per the work order contained in Memo no.2953 dated 22nd September, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the work order dated 22nd September, 2023 issued to the petitioner by the respondent no.3, he diligently executed the said work and completed the same. A completion certificate was also issued on 6th October, 2023 in that regard under the signature of the Junior Engineer, Chas Municipal Corporation, Chas, Bokaro, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. Despite completion of the said work, no payment has been made to the petitioner by respondent no.3. The petitioner represented the respondents in that regard, however, having got no response 2025:JHHC:20257 2 from them, he has been compelled to prefer the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.3 & 4 submits that the aforesaid claim of the petitioner is required to be factually examined. Hence, if he prefers a fresh representation before the respondent no.3, an appropriate decision will be taken by the said respondent within a timeframe. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of prayer made in the writ petition, without entering into merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no.3. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no.3 after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and on examining the relevant record shall take an appropriate informed decision within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. 5. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Sanjay/