Arun Kumar v. The Director General B I P A R D Govt. Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5188 of 2015 ====================================================== Arun Kumar Proprietor of M/S Arunalay son of late Ram Gopal Mahensaria, resident of Flat no E-107, Rajkishori Complex, Mulchand Path, Chitragupta Nagar, Kankarbagh Patna Bihar.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Director General B I P A R D Govt. of Bihar, Bihar Institute Public Administration and Rural Development, Walmi Campus, Phulwarisriff Patna.

2. The Deputy Director, Bihar Institute Public Administration and Rural Development, Walmi Campus, Phulwarisriff Patna.

3. The District Magistrate Sitamarchi

4. The Deputy Development Commissioner Sitamarchi.

5. The District Panchayati Raj Officer Sitamarchi. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Dayal, Advocate For the State : M/s Nivedita Nirwikar, GA 10 & Avinash Kumar, AC to GA 10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 26-06-2015 I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

In view of nature of the order to be passed in this case the same is being considered for its final decision without waiting for the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State. Petitioner claims that vide Annexure 1 dated 8.1.2008 he was given order for supply of 17 flex board for HIV/AIDS awareness training. Petitioner submits that he duly supplied the materials within the time stipulated, however, though there is already a direction of the respondent no. 2 - Deputy Director given to the District Magistrate,

Patna High Court CWJC No.5188 of 2015 (2) dt.26-06-2015 2/2 Sitamarhi vide letter dated 25.1.2008 appended as Annexure 2 that after supply of such material payment should be made to the supplier within one week, the admitted amount of Rs. 2,35,737/- has not been paid as yet. The petitioner has also represented before the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi vide Annexure 5 but he has not been communicated regarding any decision taken on his representation. In above view of the matter, this writ application is being disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi who shall inquire into the matter.

If he finds that the order was given to the petitioner for supply of flex boards for illustration purpose in the training programme and the petitioner had supplied the same, then he would be required to take steps for payment of admitted amount within a period of six weeks from the date filing of a fresh representation by the petitioner along with a copy of this order failing which unpaid admitted amount would carry simple interest @ 10 % per annum to be calculated from the date it became due till the date of its final payment. (Dr.