M/S POOJA CONSTRUCTION vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

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
Digitally
signed
by
DEEPTI
JHA
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