CWP-9439- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA (113) The Jani Co The Municipal Corporation and another CORAM: Present: KULDEEP TIWARI CM-8600-CWP dated 08.11.2021, is allowed, as prayed for, and the same is taken on as Annexure P CWP-9439- 1. Constitution of India, a challenge is thrown to the order dated 28.02. (Annexure P Panipat (respondent No.2) been denied, on the ground that the work allotted to the petitioner was upto 31.05.2022. Further, pray -2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH The Jani Co-operative Labour and Construction Society Ltd. Versus The Municipal Corporation and another HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Mr. R.C. Gupta, Advocate and Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Bhupender Singh, Addl. AG, Haryana. **** KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(ORAL) CWP-2025 Application for placing on record copy of letter for approval dated 08.11.2021, is allowed, as prayed for, and the same is taken on as Annexure P-17, subject to just exceptions. Application stands disposed of -2025 Through the instant writ petition, cast under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India, a challenge is thrown to the order dated 28.02. (Annexure P-14), as passed by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Panipat (respondent No.2), vide which the partial claim of the petitioner has been denied, on the ground that the work allotted to the petitioner was upto 31.05.2022. Further, prayer is for issuance of a (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-9439-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 17.07.2025 Construction Society Ltd. …Petitioner Versus ...Respondents KULDEEP TIWARI Bhupender Singh, Addl. AG, Haryana. Application for placing on record copy of letter for approval dated 08.11.2021, is allowed, as prayed for, and the same is taken on record, 17, subject to just exceptions. disposed of accordingly. Through the instant writ petition, cast under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India, a challenge is thrown to the order dated 28.02.2025 14), as passed by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, , vide which the partial claim of the petitioner has been denied, on the ground that the work allotted to the petitioner was upto er is for issuance of a mandamus, upon the Application for placing on record copy of letter for approval record, Through the instant writ petition, cast under Articles 226/227 of 2025 14), as passed by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, , vide which the partial claim of the petitioner has been denied, on the ground that the work allotted to the petitioner was upto , upon the MANPREET SINGH 2025.07.18 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-9439- respondents, to pay the amount of the work actually executed by the petitioner till 15.08.2022. 2. approached this Court, by filing a payment of a bill has never been acceded and decided by the Municipal Corporation, Panipat Bench of this Court, by drawing an order dated 05.09.2024 upon the respondent No.1, to consider and decide the representation/legal notice dated 20.01.2023 speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the respective parties. 3. 28.02.2025 (Annexure P Corporation, Panipat (respondent No.2), wherein, some of the claim of the petitioner was accepted, and the remaining other claims were rej 4. speaking order (supra), on the ground, that claim of the petitioner factual aspects. Court, that his contract was duly extended these issues need before the apt Court, therefore, under the examine the above said issue, and for this, the petitioner is relegated to the apt authorities concerned, to avail all other alternate 5. no money has been paid to the petitioner, out of the bills, which have been -2025 (O&M) respondents, to pay the amount of the work actually executed by the petitioner till 15.08.2022. This is the second round of litigation. Earlier, the petitioner has approached this Court, by filing a CWP payment of a bill has never been acceded and decided by the Municipal Corporation, Panipat. The writ petition (supra), was disposed of by Coordinate Bench of this Court, by drawing an order dated 05.09.2024 upon the respondent No.1, to consider and decide the representation/legal notice dated 20.01.2023 (Annexures P-9 to P speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the respective In deference to the directions (supra), 28.02.2025 (Annexure P-14), was passed by the Corporation, Panipat (respondent No.2), wherein, some of the claim of the petitioner was accepted, and the remaining other claims were rej Through the instant writ petition, a challenge is thrown to the speaking order (supra), on the ground, that claim of the petitioner qua some of the bills has been rejected, is against the factual aspects. Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to impress upon this Court, that his contract was duly extended, however, this Court f these issues need proper adjudication, by production of positive evidence, before the apt Court, therefore, under the writ examine the above said issue, and for this, the petitioner is relegated to the apt authorities concerned, to avail all other alternate At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even ney has been paid to the petitioner, out of the bills, which have been (O&M) 2 respondents, to pay the amount of the work actually executed by the petitioner This is the second round of litigation. Earlier, the petitioner has CWP-2451-2024, as its demand for payment of a bill has never been acceded and decided by the Municipal . The writ petition (supra), was disposed of by Coordinate Bench of this Court, by drawing an order dated 05.09.2024, with a mandamus upon the respondent No.1, to consider and decide the representation/legal 9 to P-11), by passing a reasoned and speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the respective the directions (supra), a speaking order dated 14), was passed by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Panipat (respondent No.2), wherein, some of the claim of the petitioner was accepted, and the remaining other claims were rejected. Through the instant writ petition, a challenge is thrown to the speaking order (supra), on the ground, that the decision wherethrough, the some of the bills has been rejected, is against the counsel for the petitioner tried to impress upon this , however, this Court finds that all by production of positive evidence, writ jurisdiction this Court, cannot examine the above said issue, and for this, the petitioner is relegated to the apt authorities concerned, to avail all other alternate remedies. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even ney has been paid to the petitioner, out of the bills, which have been respondents, to pay the amount of the work actually executed by the petitioner This is the second round of litigation. Earlier, the petitioner has 2024, as its demand for payment of a bill has never been acceded and decided by the Municipal . The writ petition (supra), was disposed of by Coordinate mandamus, upon the respondent No.1, to consider and decide the representation/legal , by passing a reasoned and speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the respective order dated Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Panipat (respondent No.2), wherein, some of the claim of the Through the instant writ petition, a challenge is thrown to the the decision wherethrough, the some of the bills has been rejected, is against the counsel for the petitioner tried to impress upon this inds that all by production of positive evidence, jurisdiction this Court, cannot examine the above said issue, and for this, the petitioner is relegated to the apt At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even ney has been paid to the petitioner, out of the bills, which have been MANPREET SINGH 2025.07.18 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-9439- admitted. This Court finds the grievance of the petitioner, to this extent, genuine. 6. 7. Haryana, accep service. He submits that he has no objection, in case, a upon the authorities concerned, to finally release the amount in a time bound manner. 8. a mandamus, were duly admitted, by passing a speaking order dated 28.02.2025 (Annexure P date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 9. July 17, 2025 Manpreet -2025 (O&M) admitted. This Court finds the grievance of the petitioner, to this extent, Notice of motion. Mr. Bhupender Singh, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents No.1 and 2, and waives He submits that he has no objection, in case, a upon the authorities concerned, to finally release the amount in a time bound manner. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is mandamus, upon the respondents, to release the payment were duly admitted, by passing a speaking order dated 28.02.2025 (Annexure P-14), to the petitioner, within a period of three months, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable (O&M) 3 admitted. This Court finds the grievance of the petitioner, to this extent, Mr. Bhupender Singh, learned Additional Advocate General, ts notice on behalf of the respondents No.1 and 2, and waives He submits that he has no objection, in case, a mandamus, is passed upon the authorities concerned, to finally release the amount to the petitioner, In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of, with to release the payment of the bills, which were duly admitted, by passing a speaking order dated 28.02.2025 hin a period of three months, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No admitted. This Court finds the grievance of the petitioner, to this extent, Mr. Bhupender Singh, learned Additional Advocate General, ts notice on behalf of the respondents No.1 and 2, and waives , is passed to the petitioner, , with the bills, which were duly admitted, by passing a speaking order dated 28.02.2025 hin a period of three months, from the MANPREET SINGH 2025.07.18 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment