P a g e | 1 WP (C) No. 3212/2025, CM No. 8642/2025, CM No. 8804/2025 S. No.130 Suppl. List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP (C) No. 3212/2025 CM No. 8642/2025, 8804/2025 Smart Edge Techno House No. 2, Welcome Lane, Water Reservoir Road, Brane Nishat, Srinagar Through its Proprietor Faisal Shahdad Aged about 33 years S/o Mohammad Iqbal Shahdad R/o Brane, Nishat, Srinagar. … Petitioner Through: Ms. Syed Ainain Qadiri, Advocate. V. 1. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir through Commissioner/Secretary to Government, Tourism Department, J&K Government, Civil Secretariat, Srinagar/Jammu; 2. Managing Director, Tourism Development Corporation, Jammu & Kashmir Government, Srinagar/Jammu; 3. General Manager (Operations), Tourism Development Corporation, Srinagar; 4. Chief Accounts Officer/Financial Advisor, Tourism Development Corporation, J&K Government, Srinagar/Jammu. … Respondents Through: Mr. Jahangir Ahmad Dar, GA. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE O R D E R 24.12.2025 1. In this Petition, filed under Article 226, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “By a writ of Mandamus: a) The Respondents be directed to release the due/admitted balance amount of Rs.12,41,500/- (Twelve Lakhs Forty One Thousand and Five Hundred) in favour P a g e | 2 WP (C) No. 3212/2025, CM No. 8642/2025, CM No. 8804/2025 of the petitioner for the work order supplied by him alongwith 18% interest from the date the same has been withheld by the Respondent-Corporation. b) The Respondents be burdened with exemplary costs and damages of Rupees five lakhs for the harassment, agony, loss and injury suffered by the petitioner for the inaction of the Respondents for withholding the balance payment unnecessarily or at least they may be directed to pay the interest amount paid by the petitioner from the date the payment has been stopped by the respondents.” 2. The background facts enumerated in the petition, under the shade and cover of which the aforesaid relief is being claimed, are that the Jammu & Kashmir Tourism Department through the Managing Director, Tourism Development Corporation, TRC, Srinagar, placed supply orders upon the petitioner through Government-e-Marketplace (GeM) and the petitioner claims to have supplied one Audio System with MIC and Speakers, 28 LG Hot and Cold AC, 4 Gas Pillar Heater, 1 LED 75 inch, 2 LED 55 inch, 1 Outdoor Display, 1 Conference Table with Chairs, supplied in pursuance of supply order no. GEMC- 511687741116675 dated 17.03.2023, and 2 HP Intel Core i5 All in One PC with 23.8 Inch Display Windows 11 supplied under a separate supply order, viz., Order no. GEMC-511687753811414 dated 04.04.2024 for an amount of Rs.39,85,000/- and Rs.1,58,000/- respectively, totaling Rs.41,43,000/- as per approved rates, specifications, terms and conditions. It is stated that against the said outstanding amount, the respondents have released only Rs.27,43,500/- instead of Rs.41,43,000/- and withheld the balance amount of Rs.12,41,500/- which has not been released to the petitioner, compelling him to knock the portals of this Court by way of the instant writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Government of India has enjoined upon all the Government Departments in all the States, which includes the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir to make purchases through online mechanism viz. GeM, and it is in compliance thereof that Respondent-Corporation issued the supply P a g e | 3 WP (C) No. 3212/2025, CM No. 8642/2025, CM No. 8804/2025 orders through GeM in favour of the petitioner in the years 2023 and 2024, however, the outstanding payment has yet to be cleared by the respondents. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is being unnecessarily made to run from pillar to post under the garb of bureaucratic wranglings. 4. Ms. Syed Ainain Qadiri, learned counsel for the petitioner, to cement her case set up in the instant writ petition, would submit that since the work/supplies carried out by the petitioner has been advantageously utilized by the respondents, therefore, the retention of payment is illegal and against the principles of natural justice. She further submits that the petitioner is also entitled to compensation keeping in view the economic inflation and other factors incidental to delayed payments and the petitioner has been put to severe adversities and prejudice, as such, is entitled to restitution on equitable terms. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing the case has submitted that the instant writ petition can be disposed of at the very threshold by directing the respondents to release the admitted balance payment of Rs.12,41,500/- in favour of the petitioner. 6. Mr. Jahangir Ahmad Dar, learned GA, appearing for the respondents submits that he is not averse to the disposal of the petition and prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, he, however, submits that the case of the petitioner will be examined on the touchstone of rules governing the field and if any balance amount is found payable to the petitioner for the supplies made, the same would be released in favour of the petitioner. 7. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and claim put forth in the writ petition with regard to release of outstating amount of Rs.12,41,500/- for the work/supplies made by the petitioner coupled with the submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents that respondents would decide the claim of the petitioner while taking into consideration claim put forth in the writ P a g e | 4 WP (C) No. 3212/2025, CM No. 8642/2025, CM No. 8804/2025 petition, it would be futile to keep this petition pending on board, as such, the writ petition is, accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondents to accord effective consideration to the claim of the petitioner for release of the outstanding amount of Rs.12,41,500/- in favour of the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date copy of this order is served upon the respondents. In the event of failure on the part of the respondents to decide the claim for release of the aforesaid amount within the stipulated timeframe, the petitioner shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum. 8. Disposed of along with connected CMs. (Vinod Chatterji Koul) Judge SRINAGAR 24.12.2025 Manzoor-ul-Hassan, Pvt. Secy.