RAM LAKHAN YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD .

(2.) THE petitioner is a labour, who has undertaken execution of contract work as mentioned in the writ petition. It is stated on behalf of the petitioner that work having been done, requisition for payment was having made but payment could not be made in absence of adequate fund allocation. From the correspondence annexed to the writ petition it is clear that at the earliest in time the authority admitted that work was done and payment was due. Having got tired of pursuing the matter this writ petition was filed.

(3.) A ' counter affidavit has been filed wherein it has been admitted that the work was done in both the cases though it was completed after a delay of fifteen days or so. The Liability Committee also does not dispute that the work was done. What is said by it is that the Executive Engineer had not certified the measurement book and secondly that there being delay in completing the work no payment could be made.