1 2026:CGHC:21750 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2273 of 2026 1 - P.R. Das S/o Shri Banising Das Aged About 50 Years R/o -Bangli Para Thakur Gali Vivekanand Ward No. -30, Hatkachora Jagdalpur Tehsil Jagdalpur- District -Bastar C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Public Work Department, Ministry Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar New Raipur District -Raipur C.G. 2 - The Engineer In-Chief Public Work Department Nirman Bhawan, North Block Sector -19, Naya Raipur Nagar Distt. Raipur C.G. 3 - The Chief Engineer Public Work Department (F/m) Sirpur Bhawan, Near Aakashwani Raipur- District -Raipur C.G. 4 - The Collector Jagdalpur- District -Bastar C.G. 5 - The Superintending Engineer Public Works Department (F/m) Sirpur VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 Bhawan -Near Aakashwani Raipur District- Rapur C.G. 6 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Department (F/m) North,- Bastar Division No,-1, Jagdalpur -District -Bastar C.G. 7 - The Sub- Divisional Officer Public Words Department (F/m) Division -Jagdalpur- District -Bastar C.G. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :- Mr. Alok Kumar Dewangan, Advocate For State :- Mr. Anand Dadariya, Dy. A.G. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB-Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 08.05.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 The Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondents to pay entire dues which is amount to Rs 36,66,707.00/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lakh, Sixty Six Thousand, Seven Hundred Seven Only) to the petitioner with imposing suitable interest @ 9% per annum from the due date of payment till the date of actual payment to the petitioner in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondents to make payment of expense for unnecessary litigation and compensation for undue suffering to the petitioner. 3 10.3 This Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records from the office of the respondents in respect of petitioner's claim. 10.4 That, any other Writ, order, directions or relief which the petitioner is entitle and this Hon'ble Court may deem fit may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the parties submit that the issue involved in the present writ petition stands squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in WPC No.5223 of 2024 (Yugal Sound Service and Electric Goods Suppliers vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others) decided on 22.01.2025. It is prayed that the present writ petition may also be disposed of in terms of the observations and findings recorded therein. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are reproduced below:– “5. Considering the submission made by the parties, the respondent No. 2 & 6 are directed to look into the grievance of the petitioner and verify whether the work allotted to the petitioner has been completed or not and if the work has been completed and the claim made by him is undisputed, the outstanding dues be released, in accordance with law, at the earliest preferably within a period of three months from today. 4 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.” 3. Since the grievance raised by the petitioner is identical to the issue considered by this Court in WPC No. 5223 of 2024 (Yugal Sound Service and Electric Goods Suppliers vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others), decided on 22.01.2025, and the petitioner herein is also claiming similar reliefs, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of and in line with the aforesaid order. It is, however, made clear that the directions issued herein shall operate only against respondent Nos. 2 & 6, and no direction is being issued against the remaining respondents. 4. No order as to cost(s). sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha