Samir Kumar Sanyal v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3923 of 2015 =========================================================== Samir Kumar Sanyal Son of Sri Shankar Nath Sanyal, Resident of Mohalla- Mitra Chowk, Hospital Road, Bettiah, District- West Champaran, The Secretary, Lok Vikash Kendra.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Secretary, Health Department Government of Bihar.

2. The District Magistrate-cum-chairman, District Health Society, Bettiah, West Champaran.

3. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical officer, the Member Secretary, District Health Society, Bettiah West Champaran.

.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rupak Kumar, Advocate For the State : M/s. Raju Giri- GP30 Aditi Hansaria, A.C. to G.P.30 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 06-04-2015 I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

Petitioner claims that, in response to notice inviting tender published in the newspaper dated 23rd March, 2010, he had responded by filing necessary papers and was given work for convening medical camp for health check up of the students in the Government Middle Schools as stated in Annexure-2 and, thereafter, it is submitted that the Lok Seva Samiti has submitted bill vide Annexure-3 on which certain clarifications were sought which were replied also but till date, no payment has been made and even security amount has not been released by the authority concerned.

Patna High Court CWJC No.3923 of 2015 dt.06-04-2015 2/2 Having regard to the aforementioned facts and circumstances, I grant liberty to the petitioner to approach the District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, District Health Society, Bettiah, West Champaran (respondent no.2) by filing a representation along with a copy of this order and also with copies of all the relevant documents raising his grievance. On such representation having been filed, let the respondent no.2 examine the matter and, thereafter, take a decision in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of submission of such representation.

If it is found that some amount of the petitioner is due then immediate steps should be taken for payment of the same through the competent authority preferably within a further period of four weeks from the date of taking such decision otherwise the admitted unpaid amount would carry simple interest @ 10% per annum to be calculated from the date it became due till its final payment. However, if the District Magistrate comes to the conclusion that no amount of the petitioner is due for some reason or other then a reasoned order should be passed and that should be immediately communicated to the petitioner.

Accordingly, this application stands disposed of. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) N.H./- U