1 CGHC010410342022 2026:CGHC:38608 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 70 of 2023 • M/s Pooja Construction A Partnership Firm (Registered Under The Provisions Of India Partnership Act) Through Its Managing Partner Shri Manish Guru, S/o Late Shri Dr. Nandan Guru, Aged About 52 Years, Having Its Registered Office At Old Market Bacheli, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioners versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. President / Collector Jila Nirman Samiti South Bastar, Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 3. Assistant Commissioner Tribal Development, South Bastar, Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 4. Nodal Officer / Executive Engineer Public Works Department, South Bastar, Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents AND WPC No. 1358 of 2023 • M/s Pooja Construction A Partnership Firm (Registered Under The Provisions Of Indian Partnership Act) Through Its Managing Partner Shri Manish Guru, S/o - Late Shri Dr. Rajkumar Guru, Aged About 52 Years, Having Its Registered Office At Old Market Bacheli, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner Versus DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Chief Engineer Public Works Department, Bastar Region, Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh. 3. Superintending Engineer Public Works Department, Bastar Region, Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh. 4. Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Bastar Region, Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, counsel appears on behalf of Mr. Apurv Goyal, Advocate. For State/Respondents : Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Deputy G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 01/09/2026 1. As the identical issue involved in these writ petitions, they are being heard and decided together by this common order. 2. For the sake of gravity, WPC No.70/2023 is taken as a lead case and the relief of the leading case is taken into consideration. 3. Heard. 4. The writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders directing the respondents to release the remaining payment of fifty percent for the construction work done in accordance with the agreement No.DL/103, DL/105 and DL/105 and authorize payments as has been admitted in letter dated 12/04/2022; 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be 3 pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.” 5. Relevant facts of this case are that in the year 2012, the Public Works Department has issued tender for construction of Polytechnic College at Geedam (Administrative/College Building); said tender was successfully awarded to the petitioner being the lowest bidder; in this regard an agreement dated 17/04/2012 has been executed between the parties and on 24/05/2012 work order has been issued by the respondents. After said allotment of contract, the petitioner firm executed the same and completed the work as per agreed terms and conditions within an stipulated time period. After completion of the work, a completion certificate dated 07/03/2015 has also been issued to the petitioner by the respondent authorities concerned. 6. By way of present petition, the petitioner is not challenging any order but seeking a direction to the concerned Respondents Authorities to release the balance and remaining payment of Rs.13,55,626/- along with interest due and payable to the Petitioner Firm. Hence, this petition. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that this writ petition may be disposed of permitting the petitioner to file fresh representation before respondent Nos.1 & 2 raising all grounds as raised in this writ petition and respondent Nos.1 & 2 be directed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law within an stipulated time frame. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/State submits that he is having no objection to the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner. 4 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 10. Considering facts of the case, submission of learned counsel for parties, this writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to file fresh representation along with relevant documents before respondent Nos.1 & 2 raising all grounds as raised in this writ petition within '15 days' from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If such representation is filed by petitioner, respondent Nos.1 & 2 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with relevant rules/law/regulation within an outer limit of '60 days' from the date of receipt of copy of such representation and they finds if any undisputed amount, disburse the same to the petitioner, subject to verification. 11. With the aforesaid direction, the instant writ petitions stand disposed of. 12. Interlocutory application(s), pending if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Deepti Jha