MUKESH KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner executed certain works under the work orders issued by the Irrigation Department in the year 2005-06. It is alleged that the work orders were executed within the stipulated period to the satisfaction of the authority. In para 5 of the writ petition it has been contended that the bills were prepared as per the contract which was evaluated by the Assistant Engineer and approved by other authorities. The bills amounting to Rs. 15,24,164/- have not been paid till date inspite of every efforts made by the petitioner. In para 8, the petitioner contends that a legal notice under section 80 C.P.C. was given to the respondents, pursuant to which a reply was given wherein the respondents have admitted the liability to pay the said amount subject to the allocation of necessary budget. This reply was given in the year 2010, inspite of which the payments were not made. Consequently the present writ petition was filed.

(2.) A counter-affidavit was filed by the Assistant Engineer on behalf of the Irrigation Department admitting the contents of paras 5, 8 and 9 of the writ petition namely the amount as per the bills, but the respondents contended that the claim has now become barred by limitation and, therefore, the said amount cannot be paid to the petitioner.

(3.) Today the Engineer in Chief Sri Awadh Naresh Gupta has filed an affidavit taking fresh grounds while contesting the matter on merits. The said respondent contended that the bills were not sent as per Clause 6 of Form No. 111 nor any registered notice was sent to the Incharge relating to completion of work. Further Clause 7 of the condition of the agreement of Form 111 was also not complied with and consequently the bills of the petitioner could not be processed.