Prashant Kumar Mishra, J
1. Petitioner has preferred the writ petitions for payment of the amount for which he has constructed the work awarded by the Nagar Panchayat,
Dondilohara.
2. The Collector, Balod has rejected the petitioner's representation by the impugned order. The nature of claim raised by the petitioner has its basis on
plea of breach of contract. In such matters, the writ petition is not maintainable, as has been held by the Supreme Court in the matter of Orissa Agro
Industries Corporation Ltd. and others vs Bharati Industries and others, reported in AIR 2006 SC 198.
3. In the case at hand also, there is dispute between the parties concerning the extent of work carried out by the petitioner and his entitlement for the
amount, as claimed by him. Since disputed questions of facts are required to be adjudicated for deciding the petitioner's claim, the writ petition is not
the appropriate remedy.
4. Here, it would be appropriate to mention that similar writ petition filed by the petitioner bearing WPC No.2673/2017 has been dismissed on the
ground of maintainability, against which the petitioner's Writ Appeal No.534/2017 has already been dismissed, though for a different work under the
same Nagar Panchayat.
5. The present writ petition is also dismissed as not maintainable.
