Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Pronounced On:06.04.2026 vs Union Territory Of Jammu And Kashmir on 6 April, 2026
Author: Moksha Khajuria Kazmi
Bench: Moksha Khajuria Kazmi
Sr. No. 06
2026:JKLHC-JMU:967
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No.836/2026
Pronounced on:06.04.2026
Uploaded on: 07.04.2026
M/S Satish Singh Jamwal & Co Pvt. Ltd.
Through its Director Sh. Satish Singh Jamwal
Age 62 years
S/o Sh. Gupat Singh Jamwal
R/o 52-E Sanik Colony, Jammu. .....Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Manik Bhardwaj, Advocate
Vs
1. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir
through Commissioner/Secretary to
Government PW(R&B) Department,
Civil Secretariat, Jammu/Srinagar
2. Chief Engineer, PW(R&B), Jammu
3. Superintending Engineer
PWD(R&B), Jammu-Kathua Circle
Jammu
4. Executive Engineer PWD(R&B)
Construction Division- I, District Jammu
Through: Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG
Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE
ORDER
06.04.2026
1. By this petition, the petitioner herein is seeking a direction upon the
respondents to release the outstanding liability duly admitted by the
respondents with respect to the contract works executed by the petitioner.
It is prayed that the respondents be directed to release the outstanding
payment of Rs.44,56,393/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from
the date of completion of the work.
WP(C) No.836/2026 2
2026:JKLHC-JMU:967
2. Pursuant to the declaration of the petitioner as L-1 with regard to E-NIT
No.CD/1/29 of 2016-17 dated 10.06.2016, the respondents are stated to
have issued allotment orders bearing, Nos.SEJ/-3439-41 dated 23rd July,
2016, whereby the petitioner has been allotted execution of the work
“providing and laying of wet mix macadam, 50 BM and 25mm SDBC on
link road from Kulla to Laswara road in km 4/0km to km 8/600 (under
City and Town programme)”. Subsequent to the allotment of the
aforesaid works, post facto administration approval was accorded at an
estimated cost of Rs.254.03 lacs. The petitioner is stated to have
completed the allotted works.
3. Respondents are stated to have released part payment in favour of the
petitioner and the outstanding amount of Rs.44,56,393/- has not been
released by the respondents till date. It is also stated that the liability has
been admitted by the respondents, which is so reflected in various inter-se
communications of the respondents, copies whereof are placed on record.
According to the petitioner, several requests have been made to the
respondents for release of the outstanding amount. Even, a legal notice
has been issued to the respondents thereby calling upon the respondents to
release the outstanding amount but all in vain.
4. Petitioner herein is aggrieved of the inaction of the respondents for
causing delay in releasing the balance payment due to him for execution
of the works duly allotted by the respondents and, as such, is seeking
direction upon respondents to release the outstanding amount of
Rs. 44,56,393.00.
WP(C) No.836/2026 3
2026:JKLHC-JMU:967
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he would feel satisfied if
the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for
release of the outstanding amount in his favour.
6. Mr. Ravinder Gupta, learned AAG, on the other hands, would submit that
the claim projected by the petitioner is time barred, however, he is not
averse to the proposition made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
7. Be that as it may, having regard to the submission made by learned
counsel for the petitioner, the instant writ petition is disposed of at its
threshold, with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim, after
due verification of the bills of the petitioner, as projected in the writ
petition, provided there is no legal impediment therefor, and take a
decision thereon by passing a speaking order, within a period of two
months from the date a certified copy of this order is made available to the
respondents, under rules. The decision so taken by the respondents shall
be conveyed to the petitioner.
(Moksha Khajuria Kazmi)
Judge
Jammu
06.04.2025
Vinod, PS
Whether the order is reportable: No