JUDGEMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. It is agreed that counter affidavit on behalf of the State has already been filed and the matter can be disposed of on merit itself. 3. Before taking cognizance of the grievance of the petitioner the Court must deal with I.A. No. 3738 of 2010, which is an application of intervention filed by one Bhupendra Singh stating therein that he is an interested party to the dispute and no payment should be made to the petitioner for the work done as the award of contract to the petitioner was otherwise illegal, invalid, motivated etc. It is evident from the said interlocutory application that the intervener is of kind of interloper because he had lost out in the race of award of the contract. The intervention application is misplaced. I.A. No. 3738 of 2010 is dismissed. 4. I.A. No. 4057 of 2010 filed by the petitioner is also not being taken cognizance in view of the fact that the Court has decided to dispose of the writ application on merit itself and no interim order need be passed. 5. Petitioner was awarded contract for installation of Water Purifying Machine in the houses of M.L.A. and M.L.C. of the State of Bihar. The total number added to 320 and the tender value of the contract was Rs. 49,60,000/-. After the award of the work since he was the successfull bidder, work has been carried out by him. Installations have been made but the payments are not coming forth from the respondent P.H.E.D. Government of Bihar. 6. It seems that the so-called intervener whose interlocutory application has been rejected was also a tenderer who failed in cornering the contract and therefore leveled allegations against the petitioner and against the department. The matter was taken up, investigated and a kind of report has now been brought by the petitioner in I.A. No. 4057 of 2010. The report dated 29.12.2009 indicates that there was no wrong doing in the award of contract. The contract was expedited because of the pressure by Honble Members of Legislative Assembly and Members of the Legislative Council but no wrong doing has emerged in award of contract to the petitioner. There is sornething to indicate that the water filters which were offered for installation are of superior quality and is of standard manufacture. 7. The contract was expedited because of the pressure by Honble Members of Legislative Assembly and Members of the Legislative Council but no wrong doing has emerged in award of contract to the petitioner. There is sornething to indicate that the water filters which were offered for installation are of superior quality and is of standard manufacture. 7. The essence of the enquiry is that there is nothing wrong in the award of the contract or so-called quality of supply and installation made by the petitioner. 8. The stand of the State is that the matter was being enquired into. Once the enquiry will be over, a decision will be taken for payment to the petitioner. 9. Enquiry seems to have been conducted and concluded. So far the question of actual installation and verification of the water filters is concerned, the petitioner has annexed many a certification of the Members of the Legislative Assembly and Council where installations have been made and satisfaction note issued. 10. If that be so, then the claim of the petitioner for payment cannot be deferred or delayed, merely because some people who have business rivalry or have otherwise lost in the race, for award of contract. 11. This writ application is disposed of with a direction upon the Principal Secretary, P.H.E.D., Government of Bihar to ensure that payment to the petitioner is made preferably within six weeks from the production of a copy of this order. This six weeks time may be utilized by them if they have any further verification of actual installation of water filters to be made. 12. This writ application is allowed of with the above direction.