Court No. - 29
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 41153 of 2019 Petitioner :- Ram Bachan Yadav Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajiv Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel.
The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for quashing of the order dated 8.11.2017 passed by respondent no. 4 Assistant Engineer, Construction Division PWD, Azamgarh. Respondent no. 4 by the said order has refused to accept the claim of the petitioner for the payment of balance amount in respect of the contract awarded to the petitioner for repair of the Martinganj Lasra Sarai Mohan Link Road.
It appears that the petitioner has raised bill to the tune of Rs. 38 lakhs in respect of the above work, out of which, a sum of Rs. 13,75,000/- has been paid to the petitioner. The remaining amount could not be paid to the petitioner as the petitioner had not supplied MM-11 relating to the supply of the raw material.
The petitioner in this regard had earlier filed Writ C No. 17466 of 2017 and the same was disposed of vide order dated 24.4.2017 and the petitioner was directed to supply the vehicle numbers which were used for transportation and supply of the WMM as also the details of MM-11. In pursuance thereof, the petitioner alleges that he has supplied photocopies of the necessary MM-11 vide his letter dated 4.5.2017 but still the payment has been refused.
A perusal of the aforesaid order reveals that the MM-11 supplied by the petitioner was not in respect of the contract in question and therefore his representation has been rejected.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we find that the petitioner for the purposes of getting the balance payment has raised disputed questions of fact which can not be gone into by us in exercise of extra-ordinary jurisdiction.
Accordingly, if any payment remains outstanding, the petitioner may either ask for arbitration, if it is, so provided under the agreement/contract or may take recourse to the civil remedies as may be available to him in law.
The writ petition for the above relief is not the proper remedy. It is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 SKS