- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 20 April 2026
- Bench
- Abdul Quddhose
- Case no.
- WP 13978/2026
Follow Madras High CourtFollow Abdul Quddhose
Judgment
ORDER This writ petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the first respondent to pay a sum of Rs.1,88,50,809/- towards the bill amount and a sum of Rs.1,09,35,856/- towards the retention amount to the petitioner based on the petitioner's representations dated 19.12.2025 and 24.03.2026 respectively within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
¶2The petitioner was appointed as a contractor by the respondent corporation. According to the petitioner, in respect of the work done by him, the aforesaid amounts are due and payable by the respondent corporation to the petitioner. The petitioner claims that even though the liability of the petitioner has been duly acknowledged by the respondent corporation, till date, payments have not been made to the petitioner. The petitioner had given representations dated 19.12.2025 and 24.03.2026 to the respondents for the aforesaid purpose. Since the same has not been considered till date, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
¶3Ms.N.Devi, learned Standing Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
¶4Since the petitioner claims that the liability has been duly acknowledged by the respondents, no prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the petitioner's representations are considered on merits and in accordance with law within a time frame to be fixed by this Court after giving due consideration to the supporting documents produced by the petitioner. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's representations. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the first respondent to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner's representations dated 19.12.2025 and 24.03.2026 seeking for payment of the alleged outstanding bill amount as well as payment of retention amount as claimed in the representations after giving due consideration to the supporting documents produced by the petitioner within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. 20-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order gm Page3 of 4 Page4 of 4
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J. gm To
1.The Commissioner, Salem City Corporation, No.1 Navalar Nedunchezian Road, Fort, Salem 636 001.
2.The Assistant Commissioner, Salem City Corporation, No.1 Navalar Nedunchezian Road, Fort, Salem 636 001.
3.The Accounts Manager, Salem City Corporation, No.1 Navalar Nedunchezian Road, Fort, Salem 636 001. 20-04-2026
Case details
Parties and counsel
Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE T.Kolandaivelu & Company, Represented by its Managing Partner, K.Manikandan, Having Office at No.18, K.A.S.Garden, Perumal Malai Road, Narasothipatti, Salem – 636 004. ..Petitioner Vs 1. The Commissioner, Salem City Corporation, No.1 Navalar Nedunchezian Road, Fort, Salem 636 001. 2. The Assistant Commissioner, Salem City Corporation, No.1 Navalar Nedunchezian Road, Fort, Salem 636 001. 3. The Accounts Manager, Salem City Corporation, No.1 Navalar Nedunchezian Road, Fort, Salem 636 001. ..Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to pay the total outstanding bill amount of Rs.1,88,50,809/- (Rupees One Crore Eighty Eight Lakhs Fifty Thousand Eight Hundred and Nine Only) and the retention amount of 5% amounting to Rs.1,09,35,856/- (Rupees One Crore Nine Lakhs Thirty Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Six Only) aggregating to total sum of Rs.2,97,86,665/- (Rupees Two Crore Ninety Seven Lakhs, Eighty Six Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Five Only) to the petitioner together with interest within the time limit fixed by this Court. Page2 of 4 For Petitioner : Mr.Vijayan Subramanian For Respondents : Ms.N.Devi Standing Counsel *****
Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.