Allahabad High Court

M/S DIKSHA CONSTRUCTIONversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS

Decided: 15 September 2026
Bench: VIVEK SARAN PRAKASH PADIA

Holding

The court declined to grant mandamus but directed the petitioner to submit a representation and ordered the authority to decide it promptly and refund the deposited amount if still held.

Summary

M/S Diksha Construction filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Union of India and other railway authorities to provide the drawing for a railway tender work and to decide the petitioner’s pending representations. The respondents indicated that the work had been dropped following a Railway Board review of sanctioned but unstarted projects. The court held that the prayer for mandamus could not be granted. However, the court permitted the petitioner to file a representation before the competent authority within two weeks and directed that the authority decide the matter within four weeks, ordering a refund of the Rs.6,36,610 deposited if it remained with the respondents.

Issues considered

Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the railway authority to provide drawings and commence work under the tender.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund of the amount deposited under the tender.
Whether the petitioner’s representations must be decided expeditiously by the competent authority.

Subjects

writ petition
mandamus
railway tender
refund
representation
High Court
Allahabad
public procurement
construction contract

Judgment

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                           WRIT - C No. - 10026 of 2022

M/S Diksha Construction
                                                                    .....Petitioner(s)
                                       Versus

Union Of India And 4 Others
                                                                 .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)             : Girja Shanker Mishra, Pratiksha Rai
Counsel for Respondent(s)             : A.S.G.I., Saumitra Singh

Court No. - 5
                        HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
                        HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.

1. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the
following prayers :-

"( i) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the concern
respondent authority to take attention on the Allahabad Division-Engineering/North
Central Railway Tender No.7820182019-211 dated 28-11-2018 and Agreement
No.74/W/9912/Bills dated 12-06-2019 and provide the drawing for start the work to
the petitioner as per their agreement with immediate effect in accordance with law.

(ii)issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent
authority to take attention on the representations dated 05-10-2019, 11-11-2019, 03-
01-2020, 8-9-2020 and reminder of the petitioner dated 22-12-2020 and decide the
same expeditiously by considering the situation and grievances of the petitioner in
accordance with law."

2. It is stated in paragraph-5 of the short counter affidavit that vide letter
dated 12.01.2022 issued by the Headquarter, NCR, Prayagraj it has been
decided to drop the subject work for "Additional Washing Pit line
berthing 24-coach length with one stabling line at new coaching complex
at NCC, Kanpur". It is further stated that aforesaid decision has been
taken pursuant to the Railway Board's letter dated 19.05.2020 whereby it
was advised to review all works, which were sanctioned but not yet
started.

3. After going through the same, we are of the opinion that the relief
                                                                                          WRIC No. 10026 of 2022
                                                                   2


                                    sought for by the petitioner by way of prayer no.1 cannot be granted. A
                                    further prayer has been made in the writ petition to direct the respondent-
                                    authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner.

                                    4. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the tender
                                    notice a sum of Rs.6,36,610/- has been deposited through online payment,
                                    copy of which is appended at page 29 of the paper book but till date
                                    aforesaid amount has not been refunded.

                                    5. In this view of the matter, present writ petition is disposed of
                                    permitting the petitioner to submit a representation in this regard before
                                    the concerned competent authority within a period of two weeks. If it is so
                                    the concerned competent authority is directed to decide the same
                                    expeditiously and preferably within a period of next four weeks. If it is
                                    found that the aforesaid amount is still lying with the respondents, the
                                    same should be refunded to the petitioner within the same period as stated
                                    above.



                                                                        (Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.)
                                    September 16, 2026
                                    Pramod Tripathi




Digitally signed by :-
PRAMOD TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…