Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6731 (UTT)

CHAIN SINGH RAWAT v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPMS/1633/2026 · 2026-06-09

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:4587 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/1633/2026 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Shivam Rana, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Swati Verma, Brief Holder for the State. 2. According to the petitioner, he was awarded a contract for “Pattri Dressing work from Km 74.00 to Km 96.00 on NH-94 (134) under OR” on 10.04.2023; he completed the work to the satisfaction of the concerned authorities within time; however, payment for the work done is not being released. 3. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to forthwith release the admitted payment of ₹9,61,852/- (Rupees Nine Lakh Sixty- One Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty-Two only) to the petitioner, as reflected in the First/Final Bill under Contract Bond No. 06/Α.Ε.-IV dated. 10-04- 2023. (Contained as Annexure No. 02 & Page no. 19 to 24). (ii) Direct the respondents to pay interest on the aforesaid amount at such rate as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, calculated from the date of completion of work (08-05-2023) until the date of actual realization, to compensate the petitioner for the prolonged and unjustified delay. (iii) Direct the respondents to decide the petitioner's fresh representation dated 21-05-2026 (Contained as Annexure No. 04 & Page no. 29 to 30) within a time-bound period, by passing a 2026:UHC:4587 reasoned and speaking order, and to release the payment accordingly. (iv) Award compensation and litigation costs to the petitioner for the financial losses, hardship, and expenses incurred due to the respondents' arbitrary withholding of payment.” 4. Learned State Counsel was asked to get instructions. On instructions, she submits that due to shortage of funds, it is not possible to make payment to the petitioner. She assures that payment would be released to petitioner as and when funds are made available to the department. 5. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of by permitting petitioner to make representation to the Executive Engineer of the concerned division. If he makes representation within two weeks, decision thereupon shall be taken, as per law, within eight weeks thereafter. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 09.06.2026 Mahinder/