2026:JHHC:12664 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.4305 of 2020 M/s. Mata Construction through its Partner Nirbhay Kumar Singh, aged about 73 years, son of Late Ambika Singh, having its office at Neelanchal Kothi Compound, Piska More, Ratu Road, Ranchi, P.Ο. Hehal, P.S. Sukhdeo Nagar, District Ranchi. ...Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Rural Development (Rural Works), Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 3. The Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner cum Special Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. and P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 4. The Chief Engineer, Jharkhand State Rural Road Development (JSRRDA) Rural Works Department, 3rd Floor, Kutchary Road, District Ranchi. 5. The Superintending Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Circle, Daltonganj, P.O. and P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau. 6. The Executive Engineer, Rural Development Department, Rural Works (Works Division), Garhwa, P.O. and P.S. Garhwa, District Garhwa. … Respondent(s) -------- CORAM: SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate Mr. Anurag Kumar, Advocate Mr. Dhruva Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhijeet Anand, AC to Sr.SC-I For JSRRDA : Mr. Sharan Toppo, AC to Dr. A.K. Singh ------ 15/29.04.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Respondents. 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition praying for quashing the order dated 10.11.2020 as contained in Memo No.619 (Annexure-13) issued by Respondent No.6 and further the petitioner prays for the security amount to be disbursed. 3. Perused the petition and document annexed with it. I do not find any averment or document suggesting admission on the part of the respondents that the petitioner is entitled for any amount and further 2026:JHHC:12664 2 the impugned order suggests that the respondents have taken plea for not releasing the amount on the ground that there was fundamental breach of contract. 4. The fact of fundamental breach of contract cannot be adjudicated in an application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution as it requires oral and documentary evidence proved through examination of witnesses. 5. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed with liberty to the petitioner to approach before the appropriate Forum / Court to raise his grievance. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 29.04.2026 R.Kumar Uploaded on 12.05.2026