1 / 3 2025:CGHC:53750 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5714 of 2025 • Basant Pandal House Through Its Proprietor Basant Banerjee, S/o Manmohan Banerjee, Aged About 73 Years, R/o Ward No. 22, Sattipara Road, In Front Of Chitramandir Sattipara, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Public Works Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Directorate Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya Vikas Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Executive Engineer Pwd, Division Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh. 4. Collector Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh. 5. The Chief Executive Officer Jila Panchayat, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh. 6. The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Lakhanpur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Rajbahadur Singh, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 04/11/2025 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs. 10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents No. 2 & 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner and release the bill amount of Rs. 45,32,363 with interest of 12% per annum in favour of PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 3 petitioner. 10.2 That, any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fir and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice along with cost of the petition.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is proprietor of Basant Pandal House, Ring Road, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, C.G.. He provided tent services and completed the work of arrangement of Tent on the direction of the concerned authority during ‘Atal Vikas Yatra’ held on 25.09.2018. The said services provided by petitioner was duly executed as directed by the authorities time to time which was verified by respondent authorities. Petitioner submitted bills towards the work done by him amounting to Rs. 45,32,363, however, respondents till date have not disbursed the same. It is also pointed out that the concerned authority has also certified the work done by petitioner and its value. Petitioner thereafter submitted representations in 2018 and in 2019, copy of which are filed as Annexure P-4, however, no steps have been taken in this regard. He submits that on 09.09.2024, Respondent No. 6/ Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Lakhanpur has sent a letter to Respondent No. 5/ Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat Surguja for allotment of fund for payment of bills submitted by the various firms including petitioner, in pursuance of which Respondent No. 5 has forwarded the same to Respondent No. 3 for taking necessary action. However, no payment of the bills has been made to petitioner till date. He submits that the petitioner is entitle for the actual amount due against the work done and placed reliance upon the decision in case of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of ABL International Ltd. & Anr. vs. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. & Ors, reported in (2004) 3 SCC 553 in support of his contention. He also submits that as petitioner is facing financial crises, petitioner may be permitted to submit fresh representation before respondents and a direction be issued to respondents authorities to consider the claim of petitioner at the earliest. 3 / 3 3. Learned counsel for respondents-State would submit that as petitioner is not pressing this petition on merits and is only seeking permission of this Court to submit fresh representation to be decided by respondents authorities in accordance with law, he is having no objection. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents enclosed along with writ petition. 5. Considering the nature of grievance raised by petitioner and the submission of learned counsel for petitioner that bills submitted by petitioner for executing the work as directed by the authorities, is also certified by the concerned officer of the respondents department and total amount of the bills submitted by petitioner is not paid to him till date, without entering into merits on the claim of petitioner, I find it appropriate to dispose off this petition at this stage permitting petitioner to submit fresh representation before the respondents raising all his grievances as raised in this petition and in turn the concerned respondents shall consider and decide the representation in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of representation, keeping in mind the decision in case of ABL International Ltd. (supra). It is expected from the respondents that if the respondent -authorities come to conclusion, after due verification of the facts that petitioner has already executed the work as directed to him, then the respondents authorities shall disburse the undisputed amount of bills regarding the work done by petitioner at the earliest. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE