2025:JHHC:21011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 3251 of 2025 M/s Vaani Enterprises, having its office at 1st Floor, Ratanjali Apartment, Burdwan Compound, Nabin Mitra Road, Circular Road, PO & PS-Lalpur, District-Ranchi through its partner namely, Manish Kumar Agarwal ... … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Pakur-cum-President, District Mineral Foundation Trust, Pakur 3. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Pakur-cum-Member Secretary, District Mineral Foundation Trust, Pakur 4. The Executive Engineer, Rural Development Special Division, Pakur 5. The District Social Welfare Officer, Pakur 6. The Nodal Officer, District Mineral Foundation Trust Cell, Pakur 7. The Assistant Nodal Officer, District Mineral Foundation Trust Cell, Pakur 8. The Assistant Engineer, Rural Development Special Division, Pakur 9. The Junior Engineer, Rural Development Special Division, Pakur … … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Vipul Poddar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, AC to AG ----- 02/30.07.2025 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent authorities to forthwith release an amount of Rs.2,30,46,300/- along with interest @ 18% per annum with respect to the construction of ‘Pre-Fabricated Building’ at Anganwadi Centers under District Mineral Foundation Trust, Pakur. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no. 5 – the District Social Welfare Officer, Pakur issued work order as contained in memo no. 132 dated 02.02.2024 for construction of ‘Pre-Fabricated Building’ at 213 Anganwadi Centers in Pakur district. The petitioner participated in the bid and awarded the said work being declared as L1. It started construction of the work at 20 Anganwadi Centers of Pakur district as per the work 2025:JHHC:21011 2 order. Subsequently, as per the direction of the respondent no. 6 – the Nodal Officer, District Mineral Foundation Trust Cell, Pakur vide letter no. 507 dated 13.12.2024, the petitioner received a communication from the respondent no. 5 vide memo no. 1199 dated 17.12.2024 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) whereby a direction was issued to maintain status-quo with respect to the said work being executed by it until further orders. 3. It is further submitted that the respondent no. 4 – the Executive Engineer, Rural Development Special Division, Pakur vide letter no. 266 dated 01.03.2025 had also informed the respondent no. 5 with respect to completion of work at 5 Anganwari Centers i.e., Rasik Tola and Manglapada in Sonajodi Panchayat, Palas Danga and Teka Tola in Kolajoda Panchayat and Purana Farsa in Farsa Panchayat. Despite the said fact, the respondents kept withholding the amount for completion of the said work. The petitioner made representation in this regard before the respondent no. 5 on 27.03.2025 requesting to release the amount for the work completed by it at 10 Anganwari Centers. However, the respondents got released the amount only for 4 Anganwari Centers. 4. It is also submitted that the petitioner thereafter made several representations before the respondent nos. 3 and 5 requesting to release the due amount of Rs.2,30,46,300/- for completion of work at 6 other panchayats and in 10 panchayats where the work was under progress. Since the petitioner’s request for payment of admitted dues of work executed by it has not been acceded to by the respondent authorities, it has been compelled to 2025:JHHC:21011 3 prefer the present writ petition. 5. Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, AC to AG appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that since the petitioners’ aforesaid claim is required to be factually examined by the respondent no. 5, it may prefer a fresh representation in this regard before the said respondent, which shall be appropriately considered and a decision will be taken within a timeframe. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of prayer made in the writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer fresh representation making the aforesaid claim before the respondent no. 5. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no. 5, after verifying the relevant records and on providing an opportunity of hearing to the representative of the petitioner, shall take an appropriate informed decision in accordance with law within eight weeks from the date of filing of the representation. 7. If the respondent no. 5 finds that the petitioner is entitled for certain amount for the work in question, the same shall be released in its favour within eight weeks thereafter. 8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Manish