Full Judgment
S.K. Katriar, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner is a civil contractor, and was issued cheque dated 8-3-1999, for Rs. 77211.00 (Annexure-1), on the Bhagalpur Treasury, for the works done by him for the State Government. The cheque was issued by respondent No. 2 (Executive Engineer, Building Construction and Housing Department, Housing Division, Bhagalpur). The petitioner; had presented the said cheque dated 8-3-1999 before respondent No. 3 (the Treasury Officer, Bhagalpur), on the same date who endorsed it for payment, but recorded 13-2-1999 as the date of his signature. The petitioner had thereafter handed over the said cheque to his Bankers for collection which raised objection about its collection on the ground that the endorsement of the Treasury Officer is of a date one month prior to the date of the cheque. Thereafter the petitioner has been running from pillar to post for revalidation of the cheque and payment, to his failure and utter harassment. Hence the present writ petition.
3. Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned S.C. appears for the respondent authorities and submits that incorrect date of endorsement of the Treasury Officer was a bona fide error on his part. He further submits that by the time the petitioner had detected the mistake, the financial year was over and, therefore, the payment could not be made. He further submits that respondent No. 2 shall revalidate the cheque forthwith, and respondent No. 3 shall pass the same for payment promptly.
4. Having considered the rival submissions of the parties, I hereby direct respondent No. 2 to revalidate the cheque or issue a fresh cheque within a period of one week from the date of handing over of a copy of this order by the petitioner to him, and the Treasury Officer shall clear the same for payment forthwith. Let it be clearly recorded that if there is any failure on the part of the present functionaries who currently occupy the offices of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in a payment of the cheque in question in the current financial year, then they would be personally answerable to this Court.
5. In the result, this writ petition is allowed with interest and costs. The petitioner shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 25% with effect from 8-3-1999 till the date of payment, and costs of this writ petition is quantified at Rs. 25,000/-. The entire amount shall be paid together and in the current financial year. It will be open to the State Government to take appropriate action against the delinquent officers and functionaries for the gross dereliction of duties and functions resulting in extraordinary harassment to the petitioner and also to realise the amount of Interest and costs from their salaries. This Court feels overwhelmed by the utter degradation of the administration of the Bihar Government, Case after case of comparable nature is reaching this Court. This State Govt. has not found one year sufficient to revalidate the cheque and make payment to the petitioner, let alone the carelessness of respondent No. 3 which is the nucleus of the problems, to the extra ordinary harassment of the petitioner. The founding fathers of the Indian Constitution could not have conceived that such routine matters of administration shall ever travel to Courts. Has the State Govt. to be reminded that administration is not the function of
this Court, but then arbitrariness is anathema to the Indian Constitution. The administration of this State appears to be in the abyss of despair, and seems to have become absolutely callous.
6. Let a copy of this order be given to Mr. Shivesh Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned S.C. during the course of the day.
7. Let copies of this order be also forwarded to the Chief Secretary as well as the Finance Commissioner, Government of Bihar, Patna.