Arbind Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7724 of 2016 ====================================================== Arbind Kumar Singh Son of Late Ramchandra Singh, resident of Bettiah Raj Colony, Narainapur, P.S. Bagaha, District - West Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Sichai Bhawan, Patna

2. Chief Engineer Irrigation Department Valmiki Nagar, District Motihari

3. Superintendant Engineer Tirhut Canal Irrigation Circle, Bettiah

4. Executive Engineer Tihrut Main Canal Unit No. 1, Bettiah, District West Champaran

5. S.D.O. Tirhut Main Canal Bagha Districtt West Champaran

6. Superintendant of Police, Bagaha, West Champaran .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhitabh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Kr. Pandey, SC-29 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 11-05-2016 Heard the parties.

The petitioner prays for release of amount of Rs. 5.25 lakhs which according to the petitioner is due for payment in respect of renovation of building and office of the Irrigation Department, Bagaha, District-West Champaran pursuant to the order issued by the Executive Engineer. According to the petitioner he has been running around for the last six years for the payment but has not received the same and an application before the Chief Engineer though filed on 25.5.2015 present at Annexure4 remains pending.

Patna High Court CWJC No.7724 of 2016 (2) dt.11-05-2016 Having considered the nature of grievance raised by the petitioner, I deem it fit and proper to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Chief Engineer, respondent no. 2 as well as the Executive Engineer, respondent no. 4 to consider the grievance of the petitioner and dispose of the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order.

It goes without saying that in case the claim so raised by the petitioner is found just and admissible, it should be paid within the period stipulated above. However, in case the same is not found admissible then the same be disposed of by a speaking order, to be passed after opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. This writ application is disposed of accordingly. (Jyoti Saran, J) S.Sb/- U