ASA ENTERPRISE Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed seeking a mandamus for release of Rs.25,68,580.00 (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Sixty-Eighty Thousand Five Hundred Eighty) only for carrying out the works of repair, leakage and water proofing of Type-II Quarters at North Eastern Police Academy, Umsaw, Umiam, Ri-Bhoi District, Meghalaya.

(2.) It is submitted by Mr. K. Paul, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Chanda, learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the Award of Contract dtd. 3/1/2023, the petitioner firm had executed the same successfully. This he submits, is reflected in the Board of proceedings of the Board of Officers held on 1/5/2023, wherein it has been recorded that the Board of Officers after inspection, were of the opinion that the work done, had been completed satisfactorily and in good condition, and the recommendation and approval for payment were duly recorded by the Head of Office and approved by the Director on 9/5/2023. He further submits that in spite of the certificate, the amount was not released to the petitioner, but instead the petitioner was served with a letter dtd. 15/6/2023, for rectification of the work, in connection with the above works. The learned Senior counsel submits that in spite of the successful completion of the work and the sanction issued by the Director, and also the payment order being made on 10/5/2023 for release of the net payable amount of Rs.25,68,580.00 (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Sixty-Eighty Thousand Five Hundred Eighty) only, the same has been withheld, which has compelled the writ petitioner to approach this, Court. It is further submitted that the subsequent letter for rectification of the work, is beyond the scope of the contract, inasmuch as, the finality of completion of the work has already been accorded by the respondents in the Inspection dtd. 5/1/2023, which had been recommended and approved. He therefore, prays that directions be issued for release of the said amount to the petitioner, within a specified time frame.

(3.) Dr. N. Mozika, learned DSGI assisted by Ms. M. Myrchiang, learned counsel for the respondents, has taken this Court to the affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents and submits that the withholding the release of the amount was due to the fact that rectification suggested by the previous Board was not completed properly, as can be seen from the letter dtd. 3/11/2023, annexed thereto. The learned DSGI has also submitted that the Report, clearly shows that certain amount of the works were still to be completed or rectified, and the recommendation by the Board of Officers on the Inspection conducted on 3/11/2023, was that the said work be rectified and completed before the same is handed over. He therefore, submits that the petitioner having not executed the work as awarded, is not entitled to the amount, and if aggrieved as the matter concerns disputed facts, can take recourse to private civil remedy.