JUDGMENT : The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to forthwith release the admitted dues along with security deposit in lieu of the work of “Supply of 5 lacs Kiln burnt Bricks of Class designation 50 sub-class "B" at Churi Colliery”, which was successfully executed and completed by the petitioner in pursuance of Agreement No.SO(CF)/NK/95-96/142 dated 29.03.1996, the completion of which has also been admitted by the respondent themselves, however, full and final payment of Rs.3,55,095.09/- along with suitable interest has not been made to the petitioner on account of non-submission of committee report to the competent authority so as to take decision regarding payment of the bricks supplied. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents stating inter alia that the agreement period of the awarded work for “Supply of 5 lacs Kiln burnt Bricks of Class designation 50 sub-class "B" at Churi Colliery” was from 05.08.1995 to 04.12.1995 and the said period was to be considered as one of the essence of the contract. The time for completion of the contract was to be computed from 10th day of issuance of Letter of Intent (LoI) i.e., 23.06.1995 or the date of handing over the site for the works whichever was later on the terms and conditions as agreed at the time of acceptance of the tender. The contract was to be completed within 4 months from the aforesaid date. As per the challans, 4,88,859 nos. of bricks in total were supplied by the contractor (the petitioner) during the period between 05.01.1994 and 07.06.1996 in different phases. The petitioner had supplied a major part of the total bricks i.e., 3,26,859 in nos. during the period between 05.01.1994 and 08.05.1995 [before the issuance of LoI and Award Letter by SO (Civil) NK Area]. The petitioner supplied only 53,160 nos. of bricks during the agreement period between 05.08.1995 and 04.12.1995 and rest 1,08,840 nos. of bricks were supplied after completion of agreement period i.e., during the period from 07.12.1995 to 07.06.1996. During the period between 05.01.1994 and 08.05.1995 (for a period of approximately 16 months) i.e., before issuance of LoI and Award Letter issued by SO (Civil) NK Area, the petitioner supplied 3,26,859 nos. of bricks. of bricks were supplied after completion of agreement period i.e., during the period from 07.12.1995 to 07.06.1996. During the period between 05.01.1994 and 08.05.1995 (for a period of approximately 16 months) i.e., before issuance of LoI and Award Letter issued by SO (Civil) NK Area, the petitioner supplied 3,26,859 nos. of bricks. This time period was abnormally long during which the petitioner kept supplying the bricks without any LoI/Award/Contract issued in his favour or any written order issued to him well before the tendering process. Therefore, supply of bricks before the contract period was not considered as fulfillment of contractual obligation. The agreement period of four months started on 05.08.1995 and ended on 04.12.1995 during which the petitioner supplied only 53,160 nos. of bricks. He, however, supplied 1,08,840 nos. of bricks during forthcoming 6 months i.e., from 07.12.1995 to 07.06.1996 without any prior approval of extension of time. 3. It has further been stated in the counter affidavit that the contract was for supply of 5,00,000 nos. of bricks, however, the petitioner had supplied only 53,160 nos. of bricks during the entire agreement period. Thus, the contract requirement cannot be termed as completed. The supply period of bricks as per the agreement and actual period of supply was different. A Committee was constituted by the then GM (NK) vide office order No. 2573-75 dated 05.10.1998 to probe into the matter. The Committee came to a conclusion after going through all the records and registers available with the concerned mine at that time. However, the said Committee did not submit its conclusive report and the same was kept in abeyance by the area management on the ground that the rate and quantity of materials were not specified in the report. 4. Thereafter, after lapse of seven years, a Second Committee was constituted at the area level by the then CGM (NK), communicated by the then SO (Civil), NK vide letter nos. SO(C)/NK/00/05-06/1270-72 and SO(C)/NK/00/05-06/1273-78 both dated 09.09.2005 to enquire into the aforesaid matter of supplying kiln burnt bricks at Churi Colliery by the petitioner and one Md. Basir respectively. The Committee submitted its report to the competent authority only with respect to the case of Md. Basir and the matter of payment relating to him has been finalized, however, the case of the petitioner has not yet been finalized due to non-submission of report by the Committee till date. 5. Basir respectively. The Committee submitted its report to the competent authority only with respect to the case of Md. Basir and the matter of payment relating to him has been finalized, however, the case of the petitioner has not yet been finalized due to non-submission of report by the Committee till date. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering that the respondents have disputed the petitioner's claim for balance payment with respect to the supply in question, no writ of mandamus can be issued to them in this regard. Otherwise also, the petitioner's money claim being more than two decades old is a stale one. 6. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. 7. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to pursue his claim before the respondent authorities.