Authorities must verify work completion and entitlement before releasing outstanding contractual payments.

The petitioner was entrusted by the Public Works Roads Department authorities with construction and repair works and the supply of office stationery under various work orders. He claimed to have completed the works and made the supplies, after which he submitted bills endorsed by the Executive Engineer. Although demand proposals were forwarded for payment, the amounts remained unpaid; only part-payments had been made against certain work orders.

The Executive Engineer issued three liability statements showing a balance of ₹7,03,083 payable to the petitioner. The respondents disputed that the petitioner’s completion of the works and entitlement to the claimed amount had been finally verified, and contended that further departmental verification was necessary.

The petitioner therefore approached the High Court seeking payment of the outstanding dues.

1. Whether the petitioner had completed the construction/repair works and supplied the materials in accordance with the relevant work orders.

2. Whether the petitioner was entitled to payment of ₹7,03,083, or such other amount as might be found payable upon verification by the respondent authorities.

3. Whether the respondent authorities should be directed to verify the petitioner’s entitlement and make payment in accordance with the Full Bench decision in Tamsher Ali v. State of Assam, 2008 (4) GLT 1.

The Court applied the principle that where a contractor or supplier claims payment for completed government work, the competent authorities may verify the execution, measurement, certification, and exact entitlement before releasing public funds.

Upon verification, any amount found payable is to be released in accordance with the principles governing payment of admitted or duly verified government contractual dues laid down by the Full Bench in Tamsher Ali and Others v. State of Assam and Others, 2008 (4) GLT 1.

The Court noted that the petitioner relied on work orders, submitted bills, departmental endorsements, demand proposals, and liability statements indicating an outstanding amount of ₹7,03,083.

However, the respondents maintained that the petitioner’s actual completion of the works and the correctness of the certified amount required further verification.

Since the Court considered such factual verification to be appropriately undertaken by the departmental authorities rather than conclusively determined in the writ proceedings, it directed the authorities to examine the relevant work orders and ascertain whether the works had been completed to the certified extent and what amount, if any, was payable.

Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were directed to verify the petitioner’s entitlement based on the relevant work orders and the extent of completion certified. If any amount was found payable, it was to be paid in accordance with Tamsher Ali.

The verification was directed to be completed within one month from the date on which a certified copy of the order was served upon respondent No. 2, followed by payment in accordance with the applicable legal principles.