IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9956 of 2026 Decided on: 6th August, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hemant Kumar Sharma …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Lakshay Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Following order was passed in this matter on 30.07.2026:- “Following order was passed in the matter on 13.07.2026:- “Respondents are stated to have filed reply to the writ petition. Though the same is not on record, however, a copy thereof was made available for perusal. 2. In terms of para-7 of the reply (preliminary submissions), the defence taken is that on petitioner having represented to the respondents for releasing payment of 3rd running bill on 23.02.2026 and 09.04.2026, the matter was taken up with the Government on 08.08.2025, 23.05.2026 and 04.06.2026 (Annexure R-2/IV 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Colly), but on account of non-availability of funds, due payment could not be released to the petitioner. The liability under outstanding running bills, if any, will be paid to the petitioner on availability of budget allocation. 3. Obligation of financial liability being due to the petitioner cannot be denied merely on projection of non-availability of funds. Final opportunity of two weeks’ is granted to the respondents to clear the admissible payments in favour of the petitioner, failing which, respondents shall remain present in the Court on the next date of hearing. List on 30.07.2026.” Mr. Rajesh Chandel, Executive Engineer, RDD (Headquarters) is present in person. Learned Deputy Advocate General has placed on record office instructions dated 30.07.2026 from respondent No.2, conveying that entire amount due towards the petitioner has been approved by the competent authority and the same shall be released in his favour within next four working days. The officer present in the Court has assured that the amount due to the petitioner shall be credited in his bank account within next four working days. List on 06.08.2026. 2. Pursuant to above order, learned Deputy Advocate General has placed on record office instructions dated 05.08.2026 from the Executive Engineer (RD & PR), Himachal Pradesh, conveying that payment admissible to the petitioner has been worked out at Rs.1,09,05,952/- and the same has been remitted to his bank account. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner acknowledges the above position, but submits that there is still outstanding payment in form of interest that is admissible 3 to the petitioner on account of delayed payment by the respondents. In view of above, the present writ petition, claiming the amount for the work carried out by the petitioner to the extent the same has been admitted by the respondents, is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. It is for the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law for the redressal of his surviving grievances. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua August 06, 2026 Judge Mukesh