1 2025:CGHC:40364-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4284 of 2025 Ashish Kumar Singh S/o Shri Girdhari Singh Aged About 45 Years R/o Rajputana House, Shanti Nagar, Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Public Health Engineer, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Mission Director Jal Jeevan Mission, Neer Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Office of the Executive Engineer And Member Secretary District Water And Sanitation Mission, Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh 4 - The Executive Engineer Public Health Engineering Division (Jagdalpur), Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Kshitij Sharma, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, Advocate General along with Mr. Shashank Thakur, Dy.A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 12.08.2025 1 Heard Mr. Kshitij Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, learned Advocate General along with Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State/respondents. ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2 2 The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs :- “10.1 A writ and/or an order in the nature of mandamus do issue calling for the records pertaining to the petitioners' case. 10.2 A writ and/or order of an appropriate nature do issue quashing the impugned notification dated 24.03.2025 and 28.02.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by the Respondent No.02 being illegal, arbitrary and in colourable exercise of power. 10.3 A writ and/or an order of appropriate nature do issue direction directing the Respondent No.02 & 03 to process the bill of the Petitioner_for payment as per the agreement and without being influenced by any circular / notification /communication, without any deduction whatsoever beyond the contract and to further discharge the petitioner from the contract, if the same is rendered inexecutable. 10.4. Cost and any other relief that may be deemed fit.” 3 Learned Advocate General raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present petition on the ground that the petitioner in the entire petition has not stated that he had any demand of claim, which has been rejected and he further states that the Circular, which has been challenged in the present petition as Annexure-P/1, admittedly, the case of the petitioner falls under terms and conditions mentioned in Clauses 1 to 4 and 3 the petitioner has to comply with said terms and conditions before claiming any payment. He also submits that present petition appears to be pre-mature one. 4 Learned counsel for the petitioner could not waived off the preliminary objection raised by learned Advocate General. 5 In that view of the matter, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh any further cause of action, so arises and if the impugned Circular is pressed against the petitioner, he would be at liberty to challenge the same. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra