- (1.) LEARNED counsel for the Respondents submits at the outset that though the counter affidavit has been filed indicating that the same has been filed on behalf of the Respondent nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 but since the Respondent Nos. 4 and 6 also happen to be Government officers of the concerned Department, the counter affidavit may be treated as filed on behalf of all the Respondents.
(2.) IN compliance with the order dated 09.12.2009, the Chief Engineer, Public Works Division (Roads), Jharkhand, Ranchi (Respondent No. 2), the Executive Engineer, National Highways Division, Barhi Hazaribagh (Respondent No. 3) and the Superintending Engineer, National Highways Division, Barhi, Hazaribagh (Respondent No. 5) are physically present in Court today. Counter affidavits have been filed on their behalf.
(3.) FROM the preliminary submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner by reference to the several documents filed as Annexures to the writ application, it appears that in response to the work orders given to him, the petitioner had executed four different works. The details of the works executed, were entered in the Corresponding Measurement Books. The petitioner raised a total bill for the payment of the works executed by him. The then Executive Engineer by virtue of his Certificate (Annexures -6 and 9) had confirmed that from the Measurement Books and other documents and on inspection, it was found that the petitioner did execute the work and he is entitled for payment of the amounts for the works executed.;