1 2025:CGHC:52447-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1492 of 2025 Bindeshwar Gupta S/o Pradeep Gupta Aged About 29 Years R/o Ward No. 6, Village Krishnnagar, Post Krishnnagar Dist. Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) (Contractor Id- Cger17643, Name- Ms Shrawan Gupta And Brothers) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh As Per Honble Court Order Dated 11-04- 2025 2 - Public Works Department Through Executive Engineer, Division Ramanujganj, Dist Balrampur- Ramanujganj, 497220 (C.G.) As Per Honble Court Order Dated 11-04-2025 3 - Public Works Department Through Engineer In Chief, E-In-C, Pwd, Nirman Bhawan, North Block, Sector-19, Capital Complex, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Dist Raipur, 49002 (C.G.) As Per Honble Court Order Dated 11-04-2025 4 - Public Works Department Through Sub Divisional Officer, Division Ramanujganj, Dist Balrampur- Ramanujganj 497220 (C.G.) As Per Honble Court Order Dated 11-04-2025 5 - Collector Through The Collectorate, Dist Balrampur- Ramanujganj 497119 (C.G.) As Per Honble Court Order Dated 11-04-2025 ... Respondent(s) MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.10.29 11:13:58 +0530 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravi Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 28.10.2025 1. Heard Mr. Ravi Kumar Kashyap, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General for respondents / State. 2. The present petition has been filed seeking following relief(s):- “10.1 This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to refund the extra royalty amount that had been deducted from the petitioner, and further be directed to deduct the royalty as per notification Annexure P/ in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/ order directing the Respondent authorities to cease any further arbitrary deductions and to adhere to the established rates for royalty payments. 10.3 That, any other relief or reliefs that may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted also.” 3 3. The brief facts leading to the present petition are that the petitioner acquired a Contract No. 68/DL/2023-24, Work Order dated 23.09.2023 under the name of M/s Shrawan Gupta & Brothers, Contractor Id - CHeR17643 & undertook repair work on Aragahi Chalgali Road, under Sub-division Ramanujganj Dist. Balrampur- Ramanujganj which had fallen into a state of severe disrepair following the monsoon season. This road had been the site of numerous accidents, causing significant hardships for the general public. In light of the seriousness of these incidents, the Office of The Executive Engineer P.W.D. (B/R) Division Ramanujganj department exerted considerable pressure on the Petitioner to expedite the completion of the work in order to reduce the frequency of accidents. Consequently, the petitioner prioritized & completed the work promptly. However, 5,880 cubic meters of gravel (Murrum) were utilized for this project, for which the Public Works Department, Ramanujganj Division, deducted a royalty amounting to Rs.8,64,360/-. According to the government rate calculation, the royalty should have been Rs.2,94,000/- (calculated as 5,880 × 50). Thus, the petitioner have been unjustly burdened with an additional financial liability of Rs.5,70,360/-. Hence this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had executed the work in question with utmost sincerity, diligence, and technical capability, strictly adhering to the directions of the respondent authorities. Despite the petitioner’s bona fide conduct 4 and timely completion of the repair work on the Aragahi–Chalgali Road, which was of urgent public importance due to its severely damaged condition and frequent accidents, the respondent department has arbitrarily deducted an excessive amount from the petitioner’s payment. It is submitted that an amount of Rs.8,64,360/- was deducted towards royalty for the gravel (Murrum) used in the repair work, whereas, as per the applicable government rate, the royalty should have been Rs.2,94,000/- (calculated as 5,880 × ₹50). Consequently, the petitioner has been unjustly burdened with an additional and unlawful deduction of Rs.5,70,360/-, causing severe financial hardship. The petitioner has also suffered significant mental distress, as the same department that compelled him to expedite the work to prevent accidents has now imposed this unwarranted financial liability. Such arbitrary and excessive deduction not only violates the principles of natural justice, fairness, and proportionality but also undermines the petitioner’s legitimate right to fair compensation for the work duly executed. The actions of the respondent Public Works Department, Block Ramanujganj, District Balrampur– Ramanujganj, therefore, appear to be unreasonable, disproportionate, and contrary to settled administrative principles, warranting interference by this Court. 5. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, submits that the present petition is not maintainable in its present form, as the petitioner has an efficacious and alternative remedy available 5 under the law to seek redressal of his grievance. It is contended that the dispute raised by the petitioner pertains to monetary claims and deductions arising out of a contractual relationship between the petitioner and the Public Works Department. Such disputes essentially fall within the realm of civil law and cannot be adjudicated in the writ jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. Learned State counsel further submits that the deductions made by the department were carried out in accordance with the records and assessments maintained by the competent authority, and there is no element of arbitrariness or violation of any statutory provision warranting interference in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction. It is therefore submitted that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the alleged excess deduction of royalty, he is at liberty to avail the appropriate civil remedy by instituting a suit before the competent civil court for adjudication of his monetary claim. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the submissions advanced by the respective counsel. 7. Upon perusal of the material placed on record, it appears that the grievance raised by the petitioner pertains to a monetary dispute arising out of contractual deductions made by the Public Works Department in relation to royalty charges. The said issue involves disputed questions of fact and assessment of contractual terms, which cannot be conveniently adjudicated in the exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. No violation of any statutory provision or fundamental right has been 6 demonstrated so as to warrant interference by this Court. 8. Accordingly, this Court finds no merit in the petition, and the same deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet