Kunal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22219 of 2014 =========================================================== Kunal Kumar, Son of Baiju Rai, Resident of Prem Shukla Market Yadav Chowk, Hajipur, P.S. Hajipur, District- Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.

3. The Deputy Development Commissioner, East Champaran, Motihari.

4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Motihari.

5. The Deputy Collector (Administration), Motihari.

6. The Treasury Officer, East Champaran Motihari. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Tej Pratap Singh, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Manish Kumar, GP 8 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 06-10-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State.

2. This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to pay the outstanding dues to the petitioner claimed at Rs. 11,93,138/- along with interest thereon towards the bills raised by him on account of the supply of furniture pursuant to the purchase order issued by the respondents.

3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that out of total bill of Rs. 12,79,433/- raised by the petitioner, only partial payment has been made, leaving an outstanding of Rs. 11,93,138/- to be paid to the petitioner and for which the petitioner has filed his representations before the authorities which are said to be pending.

Patna High Court CWJC No.22219 of 2014 dt.06-10-2015 2/2

4. In view of the nature of the grievance of the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of with consent, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the District Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari (respondent no.2) with a fresh representation, who will examine the matter and take steps for payment of the admitted dues of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. If the admitted amount is not paid to the petitioner within such period then he would be entitled for simple interest at the rate of 10% per annum to be calculated from the date it became due till the date of its final payment. It is further clarified that if the entire claim of the petitioner is not found admitted then he should be communicated the reasons for reaching such conclusion.

(Vikash Jain, J) B.T/- U