- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner is a registered contractor in the irrigation department. Certain work orders were issued by the department in his favour. The petitioner has performed the work and presented the bill. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Sharda Nagar, Khiri Uttar Pradesh-respondent no. 4 issued an account payee cheque of Rs. 77,22,010/- in favour of the petitioner. This cheque was presented by the petitioner before the bank for encashment which was returned with the endorsement of insufficiency of funds in the account of respondent no. 4. Thereafter, after some period of time but before the expiry of the period of limitation of the cheque, the petitioner again presented the cheque for credit. The bank forwarded the cheque to the respondent no. 4 by registered post for appropriate credit. It seems that the original cheque got lost by the postal authority and due intimation was given to the petitioner. The petitioner in turn informed the respondent no. 4. Since no amount was paid nor a fresh cheque was issued, the present writ petition was filed praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent-bank to credit the amount in the petitioner's account.
(3.) Admittedly, the cheque has been lost. The validity period of that cheque is also over. The said cheque cannot be encashed by any party as on date. Respondent no. 4 admits that the cheque has not been encashed. Respondent no. 4 further admits that the cheque could not be encashed in the first place on account of paucity of funds. Respondent no. 4 further admits in the counter affidavit that no sooner the funds are received from the State Government, they will issue a fresh cheque in favour of the petitioner.;