1 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR & LADAKH AT SRINAGAR. WP ( C ) No. 2732/2025. CM No.7247/2025 SARTAJ AHMAD SHAH ...Petitioner(s) Through:- Mr. Rizwan-ul-Zaman Bhat, Advocate v/s U T of J&K & Ors. . ... Respondent (s) Through:- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE ORDER 07.11.2025. 1. Petitioner came to be allotted contract regarding construction of Sub Centre Sakras, Anantnag, vide allotment order dated 6th December, 2021. It is contention of the petitioner that he executed the said work within timeline set out by the respondents. The bills for realization of payment were prepared by the respondent department and submitted to higher authorities for realization. According to the petitioner even handing over and taking over of the building constructed by him, has also taken place and a certificate in respect thereto was issued by the concerned. The workdone/realization certificate dated 6.05.2022, with respect to the building was also issued. It has been admitted by the petitioner that an amount of Rs. 1,65,375/- stands released in his favour out of total amount of Rs. 9,63,008.38/-. 2. A perusal of the petition reveals that respondent No. 2, vide communication dated 05.04.2023, which is part of the petition, has requested respondent No. 3 to release the approved funds. Further respondent No. 4 vide letter dated 10th June, 2023, requested respondent No. 3 for release of approved funds to the tune of Rs. 7.00 lacs for the work executed by the petitioner. Further the Administrative Officer of J&K Police Housing Corporation vide letter dated Sr. No. 71 2 26.05.2025, requested respondent No. 2 for release of remaining amount in favour of Managing Director J&K Police Housing, Corporation for further disbursement to the concerned contractor. 3. According to the petitioner the balance amount of Rs. 7,97,633/- is still outstanding and has not been released in his favour despite legal notice served upon the respondents. 4. Mr. Rizwan-ul-Zaman Bhat, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he will be satisfied in case respondents are directed to release admitted liability of the petitioner within a timeframe. Statement of learned counsel for the petitioner is taken on record. 5. Having regard to the limited nature of controversy involved and an innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is admitted to hearing and is disposed of at its threshold with a direction to the respondents to consider and release the admitted liability of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date copy of this order along with petition are made available to them. 6. Disposed of. (RAJESH SEKHRI) JUDGE SRINAGAR. 07.11.2025 “Abdul Rashid”