1 2025:CGHC:19936 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2135 of 2025 1 - M/s. Sunil Kumar Agrawal Through Its Partner Shri Anil Agrawal Having Its Offices At - Chandni Chowk, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh- 496001 ... Petitioner versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Having Its Offices At- Sector 19, North Block Road, Vikas Bhawan, Ground Floor, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Chhattisgarh Road Rural Development Agency - Through Chief Engineer, Having Its Offices At - Vikas Bhawan, Civil Lines, Chhattisgarh- 492001 3 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Execute Engineer Cum Member Secretary, District Project Implementation Unit, Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojna, Having Its Offices At- Vikas Bhawan, Civil Lines, Chhattisgarh- 492001 ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Chopda, Advocate For State/Respondent/s : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 01/05/2025 1. Heard Mr. Vivek Chopda, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Praveen Das, learned Dy. Advocate General for the State/respondent/s. RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.05.03 11:38:23 +0530 2 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the work order was issued in favour of the petitioner for the construction, five years routine maintenance and periodic renewal of the road constructed of rural road under the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana in the period between 07.12.2010 to 12.11.2012 and 01.12.2012 to 30.11.2017 for a single package No. CG-1103M- 01/CG-1103M-02. On the basis of the said, the petitioner’s firm carried out the work as per the Tender Agreement. 3. After completion and inspection of the work, the respondents have issued completion certificate vide Annexure P/3 to the petitioner’s firm. The petitioner firm in accordance with the general conditions of the contract, submitted monthly bills to the respondent agency before the fifteenth day of each month but the respondent agency failed to pay the sum due for the entire period of maintenance. Multiple requests have been made by the petitioner for payment but the same have been denied on the ground that bank authority has not been received. Hence, this petition has been filed by the petitioner. 4. Learned Counsel for petitioner would further submit that there is outstanding amount of Rs.37,94,310/- with the respondent authority, therefore, it is prayed that this petition may be disposed of directing the respondent authority to release the above mentioned amount at the earliest. 5. Learned State Counsel opposes the argument submitted by counsel for the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner 3 ought to have approached the Civil Court for his due amount, therefore, this petition is not maintainable. 6. Considering the above submissions and further considering the fact that on the similar facts, this Court in WP(C) No.1461/2025 has passed the order in favour of the petitioner, therefore, this petition is disposed of at this stage directing the respondent authorities to process the claim of the petitioner immediately and release the admissible dues payable to the petitioner, after adjustment of any payment either already made or any statutory deductions to be made from the dues payable to the petitioner. It is further directed that the payment should be made to the petitioner after due verification within maximum period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which, the petitioner is also be entitled for interest of the said amount @12% per annum from the date the amount failed due till the payment is actually made. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not made any opinion on merits of the case. 8. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ravi Mandavi