← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/1627/2020dismissed

Veer Chandra Rai @ Vir Chandra Ray, v. The State Of Bihar

2020-02-19Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1627 of 2020 ====================================================== Veer Chandra Rai @ Vir Chandra Ray, Son of Hazari Rai, Resident of Village- Hetanpur, P.O.- Hetanpur, P.S.- Patori, District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The District Magistrate, Samastipur.

4.

The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Samastipur. 5.

The Sub-Divisional Public Complain Officer-cum-Sub-Divisional Officer, Patori, District - Samastipur.

6.

The Block Development Officer, Patori, District - Samastipur. 7.

The Mukhia, Gram Panchayat Raj, Hetanpur (Dhamoun), P.S. - Patori, District - Samastipur.

8.

The Panchayat Sachiv, Gram Panchayat Raj, Hetanpur (Dhamoun), P.S. - Patori, Block - Patori, District - Samastipur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kapil Deo Pandey, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Ashok Kr. Gupta, AC to GP-10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 19-02-2020 The petitioner has challenged the order dated 07.12.2019 passed by the Public Grievance Redressal Cell, Samastipur.

Patna High Court CWJC No.1627 of 2020 dt.19-02-2020 2/2

2. The petitioner had approached the authority concerned for making good the balance payment of 40%. The authority concerned, on perusal of facts, found that the payment was not being made only because of the petitioner not supplying requisite documents for the entire payment.

3. No fault could be found with the impugned order dated 07.12.2019.

4. Should the petitioner be so advised, necessary documents as demanded by the petitioner be supplied to the concerned authority whereafter if the claim of the petitioner is found to be tenable, necessary arrangement could be made for making payment of the balance amount.

5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands dismissed.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) Praveen-II/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 25.02.2020 Transmission Date N/A