SUNITI KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner claims to have been engaged by the respondents as carriage contractor for transportation of cement from the departmental godowns to various sites as per their orders. He had implemented the orders issued by the respondents from time to time in the year 1988 and had raised separate bills in sums of Rs.17,000/- and Rs. 68,160/-. The respondents did not release payment allegedly due and payable to the petitioner. The petitioner did not exercise his right to obtain payment for work executed by him. Nearly 18 years after he had executed the work, he woke up from his slumber and presented a writ petition before this Court being W.P. No.21620 (W) of 2007 praying for order on the respondents to release payment in his favour. I had the occasion to dispose of the writ petition by an order dated 15.1.2008. The respondents were directed to consider the representations made by the petitioner in support of his claim for release of payment in accordance with law.

(2.) A contempt petition followed alleging deliberate non-compliance of the order dated 15.1.2008. Acting in compliance with the said order, the Assistant Engineer, respondent no.4 has passed an order dated 10.6.2009 which has been questioned in the present petition dated 31.3.2010 after disposal of the contempt petition on 5.9.2009. The Assistant Engineer in the impugned order has expressed that the matter being extremely old, relevant papers have not been found and that on the basis of the papers furnished by the petitioner he has worked out Rs.13,896/- as due and payable to the petitioner out of the claimed amount of Rs. 17,000/-. So far as the other claim in a sum of Rs.68,160/- is concerned, the Assistant Engineer forwarded the matter for consideration by the competent authority.

(3.) The ill-effects that a direction for consideration of representation without examining the claims raised on merits may bring about have been considered in some detail by the Supreme Court in C. Jacob v. Director of Geology and Mining, (2008)10 SCC 115, wherein it was ruled as follows: