Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 26180 (HP)

PAWAN KUMAR v. STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/15370/2026 · 2026-10-06

Sandeep Sharma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15370 of 2026 Date of Decision: 06.10.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Pawan Kumar ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Mohit Dogra and Dr. Khushbu Sharma, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. __________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) While placing on record communication dated 05.10.2026 issued under the signature of Executive Engineer (HPPWD) Padhar Division, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, enclosing therewith copy of communication dated 05.10.2026 addressed to Director Land Record, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General states that Department of Revenue Government of Himachal Pradesh has accorded revised administrative approval amounting to Rs. 210.00 Lakhs for construction of Sub Tehsil Office cum Residential Building at Padhar District Mandi. He further states that matter has been further taken up with the Planning 2 Department for additional budget of Rs. 37.89 Lakhs and as and when same is received, same shall be released to the concerned authorities. 2. Careful perusal of aforesaid documents which are taken on record reveals that Department of Public Works had provided fund amounting to Rs. 172.21 Lakhs/- for execution of work, which stand fully utilized for discharge of contractual liability. Now sum of Rs. 27,11,716/- remains to be paid on account of deviation of work, 10CC claim (price escalation) and GST reimbursement. 3. Learned Additional Advocate General states that since substantial amount already stands paid and only sum of Rs. 27,11,716/- on account of deviation of work remains to be paid, this Court may dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to pay the remaining amount expeditiously. 4. Consequently, in view of facts noticed hereinabove, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and accordingly, same is disposed of with a direction to the Executive Engineer (HPPWD) Padhar Division District Mandi to ensure that remaining sum of Rs. 27,11,716/- is paid to the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of eight weeks, failing which the respondent department would be under obligation to pay interest at 3 the rate of 6% from the date aforesaid amount became due. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly. October 06, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge