HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 31663 of 2025 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has prayed for the following relief: "(A) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondent no.4 to pay the retention money (deducted from bill) sum of Rs.6,32,261/- along with 18 % interest to the petitioners pursuant to the contract Bond No. 22/EE/PD/SBL/2020-21 & 24/EE/PD/SBL/202-21 & 23/EE/PD/SBL/2020-21 & 35/EE/PD/SBL/2020-21 dated 10.03.2021, 13.07.2021 and 19.04.2021. (B) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents specially the respondent no.4 to decide the representation dated 18.08.2025 filed by the petitioners. (iii) Issue any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case. (iv) Award cost of the petition to the petitioners" 3. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent no.3 issued an advertisement for various works including patching of road side work as well as renovation of the residential campus. Pursuant to the said Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arvind Kumar Singh, Veerendra Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. M/S Zarif Ahmad Contractor And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) advertisement, the petitioner applied tender, and petitioner being the lowest bidder was awarded contract. The petitioner completed the entire work as per the terms and conditions of the contract, and thereafter final bill was prepared by the respondent no.2, and the same was paid to the petitioner, but the retention money (deducted from bill) i.e. Rs.6,32,261/-was not paid to the petitioner by the respondent no.4. The petitioner in this respect submitted several representation to the respondents, but no heed has been paid on the same. 4. Learned Standing Counsel submits that no useful would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and appropriate direction may be issued to the respondent no.4 to consider the grievance of the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed off permitting the petitioner to submit a fresh representation ventilating all his grievances before the respondent no.4-Executive Engineer, Construction Division, Public Works Department, Sambhal along with a certified copy of this order within a period of one month from today. In case any such representation is filed by the petitioner, respondent no.4 shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law after giving due notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period one month thereafter. September 25, 2025 NS WRIC No. 31663 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad