1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2400 of 2026 1 - M/s Sharma Steel Industries Limited Through Power Of Attorney Holder Sunil Kumar Sharma S/o Lt. Ramchandra Sharma Aged Bout 58, Years R/o H. No. -11/ 16/ 4/4, Gurudwara Road Kharsiya Ward No.- 16 District Raigarh. C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Higher Education Department Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District Raipur C.G. 2 - Commissioner Directorate Of Higher Education Indrawati Bhawan Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District Raipur C.G. 3 - Principal Mahatma Gandhi Post Graduation College, Kharsiya District Raigarh C.G. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :- Mr. Sumit Singh Rathore, Advocate For State :- Mrs. Anusha Naik, Dy.G.A. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 13.05.2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction upon the respondent authorities to consider and decide the representations of the petitioner and release payment of ₹50,000/- towards supply of furniture/articles made to a Government institution in the financial year 2021–2022. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner, a small industrial unit engaged in manufacturing and supply of furniture, claims to have supplied furniture worth ₹50,000/- to Government Mahatma Gandhi Post Graduate College, Kharsia, District Raigarh, against valid supply orders during the financial year 2021–2022. It is stated that bills and vouchers were submitted, however, payment has not been released despite repeated representations. The petitioner asserts that representations dated 29.12.2023 and 08.10.2024 are still pending consideration before the competent authority. 3. Following reliefs have been sought in the present petition :- 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction to the respondent authority to decide the representations of the petitioner which is pending before the respondent authority dated 29-12-2023 and 3 08-10-2024 (Annexure P-6) and to act in accordance with law and pay the dues of Rs.50,000 (Fifty Thousand) to the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction for immediately payment of all the dues and clear all the bills and vouchers, in the larger interest of justice. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner together with cost of the petition.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has duly supplied the goods pursuant to official demand/order and the same is not in dispute. It is further submitted that despite multiple reminders and communications from the concerned departmental authorities themselves recommending release of payment, the respondents have failed to clear the legitimate dues, resulting in serious financial hardship to the petitioner. 5. Learned State counsel submits that the matter relates to verification of bills and if any dues are found payable in accordance with rules, the same shall be released, however, appropriate decision is yet to be taken on the representations pending before the competent authority. 6. This Court has considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4 7. It is well settled that in contractual or supply-related monetary claims, this Court under Article 226 does not adjudicate disputed factual issues but can certainly direct the competent authority to consider and decide representations within a time-bound period in accordance with law. 8. In the present case, it is not disputed that the petitioner has submitted representations seeking payment of ₹50,000/- which remain pending consideration. The grievance of the petitioner, therefore, is limited to non-decision of the said representations and non-release of payment, if found admissible. 9. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the following directions that the petitioner shall be at liberty to file a comprehensive representation along with all supporting documents, including earlier representations dated 29.12.2023 and 08.10.2024, before Respondent No. 2 within a period of two weeks from today, if not already pending. Respondent No. 2/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the said representation strictly in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the same. If upon verification it is found that the petitioner has duly supplied goods/services in accordance with the work order and the dues are legally payable, the respondent authorities shall release the admitted amount of ₹50,000/- expeditiously thereafter, without unnecessary delay. 5 10. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner, and all issues are left open to be examined by the competent authority. 11. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. 12. No order as to costs. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha