Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
And Mission & Anr vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 4 December, 2023
04.12.2023
court no. 35
serial no. 25
kaushik
WPA 16022 of 2021
Gazole Community Development Society
and Mission & Anr.
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. S. P. Lahiri,
Md. Habibur Rahman
Mr. Rajesh Naskar, Advocates
... ... for the Petitioners
Mr. Rama Prasad Sarkar, Advocate
... ... for the State
The petitioner is a registered society namely,
Gazole Community Development Society and Mission,
which have undertaken the job of construction of
toilet under the project 'Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan' and
'Swachchh Bharat Mission (Gramin)'.
Petitioner no. 1 was appointed w.e.f.
22.07.2014 and on 22.12.2014 a work order was
issued in its favour for construction of IHHLs under
such 'Swachchh Bharat Mission (Gramin)' programme
as per government approved rate and model
estimate.
According to the petitioner, it has completed the
assigned work within time and upon due progress and
completion of its work, the concerned authorities have
issued completion certificate, in due course of time.
Thereafter, the petitioner has submitted bills (7 in
total) with the concerned authorities of an amount of
Rs.70,45,000/- in total, in terms of the engagement
letter dated 22.07.2014.
2
The petitioner has alleged that, the authorities
have, till now, not disbursed the bill amount in spite of
not raising any objection as to the work done and
issuance of due completion certificate in his favour. It
has also alleged that the authorities have either
remained silent to explain the reason of withholding
the bill amount or has come forward with
unsustainable reasons, in reply to the application of
the petitioner, made under the Right to Information
Act, 2005. The petitioner has sought for redressal of
the grievance by a mandate issued upon the
respondent authorities to immediately release the
amount of bill as stands outstanding with the respondent authorities.
Mr. Rama Prasad Sarkar, learned advocate is appearing for the State. However, the record reveals that, the State has not preferred to file any affidavit- in-opposition in spite of there being a direction upon the State to that effect, since there is no order of the Court found in record, directing any affidavit-in- opposition to be taken on record. Mr. Sarkar is unable to assist the Court in this regard. By referring to the documents annexed with the writ petition/supplementary affidavit, he has submitted that, the original bills received from the petitioner by the Block Development Officer (BDO) has been duly forwarded to the concerned authority for processing and disbursement.
Mr. S. P. Lahiri, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that, pursuant to the letter of provisional engagement dated 22.07.2014, the petitioner was entrusted with the job under the said scheme, to be executed in terms of the government approved rate. There has not been any other 3 condition stipulated, to be complied with before completion of a job excepting that the job has to be done at government approved rate and model estimate within the stipulated area. He has further relied on the completion certificates and submitted that issuance of completion certificates without any objection by the respondent authorities is the conclusive proof of the fact that the work has been done in terms of the specifications in the work order. He state that his client accordingly submitted seven number of bills in total.
Mr. S. P. Lahiri, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has further referred to the reply of the concerned authority to his client's prayer under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. The following relevant portions of the same may be quoted hereinbelow:
"9) P-6 is admitted. All the bills so submitted by the petitioner to this end on different dates were forwarded in original to the Officer-in-charge, sanitation & D.P&R.D.O, Malda vide this office memo no.177/GPS dt. 10.04.2015, 227/GPS, 238/GPS Dt.12/05/2015, 240/GPS Dt.
13/05/2015, 308/GPS Dt/ 03/06/2015, 279/GPS Dt.26/07/2016, 276/GPS dt. 26/07/2016, 278/GPS dt.26/07/2016, 277/GPS Dt.
26/07/2016, 248/GPS dt. 13/07/206, 334/GPS Dt. 14/09/2016. The copy of those forwarding letters are enclosed herewith.
10)P-7 is admitted. In pursuance of memo no.944/MZP-15/SBM(G) Dt. 27/04/2015 of the ADM & AEO, MZP, Malda the earlier order under memo no. 585/GPS Dt.16/12/2014 was cancelled and the Sanitary Mart including the petitioner were reassigned vide memo no. 119/GZL dt. 14/05/2015 (enclosed the copy of the letter)."
He further referred to the report submitted by the District Magistrate (DM), Malda in the Writ Petition No. 16022 of 2021. From the same, he has pointed out that the concerned authorities have reported non-
4submission of proper bills/claim by his client as the reason for non-payment of the bill.
Mr. S. P. Lahiri, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that firstly, after execution of the work in terms of the work order, the petitioner is entitled to the cost of the same to be paid to him. Secondly, he has submitted that after issuance of the completion certificate without raising any question, the quality of work as well as the due completion of the same cannot be questioned by the authority. On these premises, he prays that, his client is entitled to expenditure incurred on completion of work which cannot be lawfully withheld by the respondent authority.
So far as the contention of the respondent authorities regarding non-submission of the original bills of his client is concerned, the writ petitioner has pointed out to the respective letters of the department accepting receipt of the original bill and forwarding the same to the other authorities responsible for release of the bills for the purpose. On the prayers of the petitioner as above, Mr. S. P. Lahiri, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner seeks necessary direction for setting aside the decision of the respondent authority of paying him an amount of Rs.75,000/-, instead of his actual entitlement under the said bills and other appropriate orders to be passed.
From the letter dated 14.05.2015, it appears that the respondent no. 9, i.e., the Block Development Officer (BDO), Gazole Block, by dint of its said order, has stipulated that the toilet to be made under the project as mentioned above, should pertain to the households whose names are shown in 5 the 'baseline data'. This stipulation was, however, not there in the provisional engagement letter issued to the present petitioner on 22.07.2014. Record, however, reveals that the petitioner had completed the work within the stipulated time and received the completion certificate upon satisfaction of the authorities regarding due completion of the work. Therefore, stipulations made by the respondent no. 9, the Block Development Officer (BDO), Gazole Block, dated 14.05.2015 for completing toilet for the households shown in the 'baseline data' only, should not apply in case of the petitioner.
Notably, this is not, however, the ground for which bills of the petitioner, as submitted on completion of work has been withheld. The reasons for withholding the bill are shown to be submission of inappropriate bills by the petitioner, in the report filed in WPA 16022 of 2021. Unfortunately, this appears to be only on the basis of guesswork, surmises and afterthought, in view of the previous communications between the various authorities of the department, receiving and forwarding the original bills submitted by the petitioner along with the compact disk (CD).
The reasons shown are palpably bad, untenable and unacceptable. Today, Mr. Sarkar while representing the State has also accepted about due submission of bills by the petitioner. The obvious consequence is setting aside of the decision of District Magistrate, Malda for not granting the bill amount to the petitioner and sanction of an amount of Rs.75,000/- only to the petitioner, for the work done as mentioned above.
For the ends of justice, it is found appropriate that the petitioner be directed to serve a photocopy of 6 the writ petition and the supplementary affidavit along with annexures, to the respondent no. 3, District Magistrate, Malda, within fifteen days from the date of this order. The District Magistrate, Malda shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner/authorised representative of the petitioner and any other person, as it deems fit and proper. The District Magistrate, Malda thereafter will proceed on the basis of the relevant annexed documents in the writ petition for the purpose of releasing the due bill amount to the petitioner, pursuant to the provisional engagement letter issued to the petitioner dated 22.07.2014 and the completion certificates, issued to him. An amount of interest shall also be released to him, w.e.f the date of forwarding his original bills by the Block Development Officer (BDO), to the appropriate authority. The interest shall be calculated at the existing rate of interest of a saving account, of a nationalized bank. The entire exercise, as above, shall be concluded within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the writ petition, in terms of this order.
WPA 16022 of 2021 is disposed of accordingly, without any order as to costs.
(Rai Chattopadhyay, J.)