Meena Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2032 of 2019 ====================================================== Meena Kumari Shri Suresh Ray resident of Village- Hilalpur, P.S- Industrial Area Hajipur, District- Vaishali, Hajipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar and Ors through Principal secretary, Building Construction department, Government Of Bihar, Patna 2.
The Collector, Vaishali, Hajipur Bihar 3.
The Executive Engineer, Vaishali Division, Hajipur, District- Vaishali Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Braj Kishore Singh Chouhan, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Tripurari Nath Ambastha A.C. to Sc26 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 17-04-2019 A counter affidavit has been filed today on behalf of the respondents. In paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit a categorical statement has bee made saying that the payment amounting to Rs. 572987/- has been made to the petitioner vide office voucher no. 111 dated 29.03.2019 by cheque bearing no. 818094 dated 30.03.2019. A copy of the voucher in this regard is placed on the record as Annexure 'A' to the counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although he has not received instruction in this regard but what is appearing from the counter affidavit cannot be controverted by him. Learned counsel however submits that in case any dues is still found remaining with the respondents the petitoner will be given liberty to raise all issues with the respondents.
Patna High Court CWJC No.2032 of 2019(2) dt.17-04-2019 2/2 This writ application is disposed of in the given facts and circumstances, however in case, it is found that the petitioner is not satisfied with the amount received from the respondents he will be at liberty to bring it to the notice of the competent authority. This order would however not be taken as liberty to the petitioner to raise any other and further claim for which he has already executed a discharge in favour of the respondents.
This writ application stands disposed of.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U