NIRANJAN KUMAR NANDA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner had undertaken to carry out certain repair works at the residential quarters of the Sub-Divisional Officers, Nalanda. He did the work, submitted the bill and payments were withheld.

(2.) Admittedly, as per paragraph 6 of the counter-affidavit, District Magistrate did not give it priority for payment and as per the work allotment it was clearly stated that payment would be made on availability of allotment and prioritiy sent by the District Magistrate. It is not disputed that the work was done and bills were prepared. It is then stated in the counter-affidavit that in 2007 after almost a year of the work having been done the District Magistrate, Nalanda got an inquiry set up into the quality of work which is evident from Annexure-B to the counter-affidavit. The District Magistrates have come and gone but nothing has come about the enquiry or payment.

(3.) First payments are made on the priority set by District Magistrate then bills are prepared then the District Magistrate orders inquiry and leave it. What decides priority no one knows and once funds are received for payments, bills prepared, the District Magistrate initiates inquiries. Then we have Annexure-5 to the rejoinder wherein the Executive Engineer is asking to Chief Engineer for permission to make payment as allotment is there but something is amiss and that is the answer which petitioner seeks. The answer is Annexure-5 dated 29.3.2008. From the aforesaid, it appears that the inquiry matter has ended.