Contractor locks public stadium over Rs 1 crore dues, Orissa High Court orders immediate removal

“The Petitioner cannot resort to self-help or coercive measures to enforce a monetary claim. Even if any amount is due, the appropriate remedy lies in approaching the competent authority or initiating proceedings in accordance with law for the recovery of such dues,” the court said on April 8.

Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi noted that the petitioner cannot resort to coercive measures to enforce a financial claim.

The order noted that taking the law into one’s own hands by restricting access to public property is impermissible in law.

Dues of payment and locking of stadium

The petitioner, Nrusingh Charan Mudali, was selected in 2023 to execute the construction and development of the “Mahapurusha Shri Achyutananda Mini Stadium, Nemalo”. The project was situated on land recorded under the Higher Education Department, Odisha.

Following the substantial completion of the stadium, the petitioner was reportedly asked orally to complete additional works, including flooring and a changing room, which he claims to have finished on a “war footing” at his own expense.

He alleged that while the total project and additional work costs exceeded Rs 1.87 crore, he received only Rs 82 lakh in running bills. The Petitioner submitted that he has incurred expenditure towards labour and materials on credit and is suffering severe financial hardship, mental agony and physical stress due to non-payment.

The Petitioner repeatedly approached the authorities for the release of his dues. An inquiry was conducted by the BDO, Nischintakoili, and the report dated February 17, submitted to the Sub-Collector, Sadar, Cuttack, clearly records that although the Stadium has been completed, the executant has not received full payment for the expenditure incurred.

While claiming severe financial hardship and non-payment of his final dues, the petitioner subsequently locked the stadium.

On February 21, the Sub-Collector and Sub-divisional Magistrate, Cuttack, acting on a report from the Tahasildar regarding unauthorised obstruction and potential breach of peace, issued an ex parte order under Section 152 of the BNS.

The order directed the immediate removal of the lock and the handing over of the keys of the Block Development Officer (BDO), asserting that “no private dispute shall obstruct public access to this government property”.

‘Can’t resort to coercive measures’

While emphasising that the stadium is public property, the court said that we found no illegality or impropriety in the sub-collector’s order. The court highlighted that the petitioner cannot resort to coercive measures to enforce a financial claim.

The court dismissed the plea but noted that the dismissal does not preclude the contractor from pursuing legal remedies for the recovery of his alleged dues before a competent forum.

Upon conclusion, the court cautions the petitioner against engaging in unlawful activities in the future.