GOVIND AGRAWAL vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WPC/1656/2026

Disposed: Contested--WITHDRAWN on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010125712026

Filing Number

WPC/7233/2026

Filing Date

25-Mar-2026

Registration No

WPC/1656/2026

Registration Date

08-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Coram

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

MERCANTILE LAWS, COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS INCLUDING BANKING ( 21 )

Sub-Category

CONTRACT ACT. ( 2103 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--WITHDRAWN

Last updated 17-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GOVIND AGRAWAL

    Adv. TUSHAR DHAR DIWAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

  2. 2.Engineer In Chief,

  3. 3.Chief Engineer (E and M)

  4. 4.Superintending Engineer (E and M)

  5. 5.Executive Engineer (E and M)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice,Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar AgrawalView PDF

    Summary: The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed a contractor's writ petition seeking Rs. 4,82,158 for completed electrical work, ruling that the claim arises from a contractual dispute requiring detailed factual examination inappropriate for writ jurisdiction under Article 226. Though the petitioner claimed the amount was admitted and undisputed, the court found that verification of measurements, sanction of amounts, and compliance with contractual conditions necessitate adjudication better suited to civil courts or arbitration, not extraordinary writ proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

  4. 25-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPC/1656/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed a contractor's writ petition seeking Rs. 4,82,158 for completed electrical work, ruling that the claim arises from a contractual dispute requiring detailed factual examination inappropriate for writ jurisdiction under Article 226. Though the petitioner claimed the amount was admitted and undisputed, the court found that verification of measurements, sanction of amounts, and compliance with contractual conditions necessitate adjudication better suited to civil courts or arbitration, not extraordinary writ proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case