1 2025:CGHC:55520-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5936 of 2025 Progressive Construction Limited, Through Its Authorized Person Mr. Srinivas Jilla, Corporate Office At 7th Floor, Raghava North Block, Raghava Ratna Towers, Chirag Ali Lane, Abids, Hayderabad- Telangana 500001. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Project Director, Public Works Department, Chhattisgarh Road Development Project, Piu, Adb Project, Sirpur Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001. 2. Executive Engineer Public Works Department, (B/r) Kondagaon Division, Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. 494226 3. Superintending Engineer Public Works Department, (B/r) Kanker Circle, Kanker, Chhattisgarh 494334 4. Principal Secretary Public Works Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492002. 5. Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, Nirman Bhawan, Sector 19, Naya Raipur, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 492002. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Paranjpee, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Rishabh Garg, Advocate For Respondent No. 1/ State : Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, Advocate General along with Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.11.14 15:07:44 +0530 2 14/11/2025 1. Heard Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Rishabh Garg, counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, learned Advocate General along with Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, G.A. for respondent/ state. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for following relief:- “10.1) The Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction against the Respondents to decide the Petitioner's claim of payment of final bill in a time bound manner, so that, the Petitioner can approach the Chhattisgarh Madhyastham Adhikaran, Raipur for its claims, and 10.2) Cost of the petition may also be granted to the Petitioner, and/or 10.3) Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the Petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 3. Facts of the case is that the Petitioner, a reputed Class-A contractor company, was awarded the work of “Rehabilitation and Upgradation of Bhanupratappur (Km 0) to Narayanpur–Kondagaon (Km 141.9) Section in Chhattisgarh” under Loan No. 2050 IND—Chhattisgarh State Roads Sector Development Project, Phase-1, Package-7A, vide contract dated 28.12.2006 valued at Rs. 107,09,58,225/-. The Petitioner successfully completed the entire work on 01.05.2015, and the defect liability period concluded on 01.05.2016. The Respondents themselves acknowledged the completion by issuing a Work Experience Certificate on 20.08.2015 and a Performance Certificate on 21.08.2017. Despite 3 completion of all contractual obligations, the Respondents have failed to finalize and release the Petitioner’s bill, which has remained pending since 2015. The Petitioner has submitted several representations dated 27.10.2017, 04.07.2018, 06.06.2020, 10.06.2020, 03.08.2020, 18.06.2024 and 25.03.2025, none of which have been addressed. Further Information obtained under the RTI Act indicates that the payment has been withheld due to non-allocation of funds, which is not a valid ground in law for denying the Petitioner its rightful dues. The prolonged and unjustified withholding of the final bill for over a decade, despite admitted completion of work, is arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, thereby compelling the Petitioner to approach this Court seeking directions for finalization and release of the final bill so as to enable it to avail appropriate remedies before the Chhattisgarh Madhyastham Adhikaran, Raipur. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner representations for the settlement of the payment of bill is pending before the concerned authority since 2015 and several representations have been made but the same has not been decided till date and without deciding the same he cannot approach the arbitration tribunal. He further submits that the persons who approach the arbitration tribunal the primary objection raised by the State before the Arbitration Tribunal is that the appeal is not maintainable under Section 2 (d) of C.G. Madhyastham Adhiniyam, 1983. 5. Learned State counsel further submits that representation of the petitioner is still pending and the same will be decided within a 4 stipulated period as per the law. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with the petition. 7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material placed on record and also considering the submission made by learned counsel for the State, this Court is of the view that the grievance of the petitioner can be redressed at this stage by directing the Respondents to take an expeditious decision on the pending representations. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed off with a direction to the concerned competent authority of the Respondents to consider and decide the petitioner’s pending representations for finalization and release of the bill, in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claims of the petitioner, and the authority shall pass a reasoned and speaking order. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Jyoti