Santosh Kumar Sahi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14 of 2016 ====================================================== Santosh Kumar Sahi, son of Shri Bhagwan Prasad Sahi, Prop.- M/S Bhagwan Construction, Resident of Mohalla-Agarwa Motihari, P.S. Motihari (Town), District - East Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.

2. The Additional Collector cum Nodal Officer R.T.P.S. Cell, East Champaran at Motihari.

3. The Incharge Officer, RTPS Cell, East Champaran, Motihari.

4. The District Public Complain Cell, East Champaran at Motihari.

5. The Sub Divisional Magistrate Sadar Motihari.

6. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Raxaul, District - Motihari.

7. Anchal Adhikari, Motihari, District - East Champaran.

8. Anchal Adhikari, Sugauli, District - East Champaran.

9. Anchal Adhikari, Turkaulia, District - East Champaran.

10. Anchal Adhikari, Kotwa, District - East Champaran.

11. Anchal Adhikari, Banjaria, District - East Champaran.

12. Anchal Adhikari, Raxaul, District - East Champaran.

13. Anchal Adhikari, Chauradaro, District - East Champaran.

14. Anchal Adhikari, Adopur, District - East Champaran.

15. Anchal Adhikari, Ramgarhwa, District - East Champaran.

16. Anchal Adhikari, Pipra Kothi, District - East Champaran. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Sumit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. N. Hoda Khan, SC-18 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 10-05-2016 Heard Mr. Sumit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Idris, Assisting Counsel to SC-18 for the State.

In the nature of the order which this Court proposes to pass, it would not require awaiting a counter affidavit by the respondents. Suffice it to say that the petitioner has provided

Patna High Court CWJC No.14 of 2016 (2) dt.10-05-2016 generator services to the Collectorate Office, East Champaran pursuant to an agreement entered in between the petitioner and the District Magistrate, East Champaran on 22.7.2011, a copy of which is placed at Annexure-1. An office order bearing Memo No.48 dated 29.7.2011 was issued under the signature of Additional Collector cum Nodal Officer, R.T.P.S. Cell, East Champaran, Motihari present at Annexure-2. According to the petitioner who happens to be the proprietor of M/s Bhagwan Construction having its office and works at Agarwa in the District of East Champaran, he was required to provide generator services in different Sub-Divisions, the details of which are present at Annexure-3 series during the period August, 2011 to December, 2012.

According to the petitioner the dues payable to him for the services rendered under the agreement present at Annexure-3 is to the tune of Rs.23,93,200/-. He submits that the representation filed by the petitioner was also acted upon by the District Magistrate, East Champaran as manifest from his letter dated 26.3.2015 present at Anneuxre-6 but has not reached its conclusion. It is submitted that since despite these circumstances where the petitioner is made to run around the office of the Collectorate for his dues that he has approached this Court.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

Patna High Court CWJC No.14 of 2016 (2) dt.10-05-2016 considering the nature of grievance raised as also taken note of by the District Magistrate, East Champaran as manifest from his letter dated 26.3.2015, I deem it fit and proper to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the District Magistrate, East Champaran to dispose of the claim raised by the petitioner for which he has already initiated action, so as to reach its conclusion within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

It goes without saying that the admissible dues be paid to the petitioner within the same period and in case any part of the dues is found not admissible, the same be disposed of by a reasoned order to be passed within the same period This writ petition is disposed of.

(Jyoti Saran, J) S.Sb/- U