M/S Patil Construction And Infrastructure Ltd. v. State Of Chhattisgrh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2793 of 2018 • M/s Patil Construction And Infrastructure Ltd. Having Its Office At 3rd Floor, Pmpml Commercial Building No.1, Pune (Through Its Authorized Signatory, Shaliwan Chandrakant Surwase), District : Pune, Maharashtra ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgrh Through The Secretary, Department Of Public Works, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways, Transport Bhawan No.1, Parliament Steet, New Delhi

3. Chief Engineer (Lwe) Mort And H Transport Bhawan No.1, Parliament Street, New Delhi

4. The Chief Engineer Public Works Department, Bastar Zone, Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh

5. The Superintending Engineer Pwd Kanker Circle, Kanker, Chhattisgarh

6. Executive Engineer Pwd (B/r), Division Bhanupratappur, District- Bastar, Chhattisgarh -----Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :

Shri Sunil Otwani and Shri Harshwardhan, Advocates For Respondents /State :

Shri PN Bharat, Additional Advocate General with Shri Gary Mukhopadhyay, Government Advocate For Respondent- 2 :

Shri B Gopa Kumar, Assistant Solicitor General --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice & Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board Per Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice 26.11.2018 1.

Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the respondents. 2.

This writ application is disposed of at this stage with a direction upon the concerned respondents that a joint inspection of the work so

wpc 2793 of 2018 completed in relation to the project will be carried out and based on such an inspection, the question of making payment to the petitioner will be decided, preferably within a period of three months thereof. 3.

The Court refuses to express any opinion on the merits at this juncture.

4.

It is made clear that even though National Highway Authority of India may not have been made a party respondent in the present writ application but since they are integral to the present dispute therefore, the order and direction so passed will also bind them. Sd/- Sd/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi) (Parth Prateem Sahu) Chief Justice Judge padma