Sanjay Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16256 of 2017 =========================================================== Sanjay Kumar Singh, Son of Late Yamuna Singh, resident of VillageGirdharpur, P.O.- Paanjar, Police Station - Karhghar, District- Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Building Construction Department, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Chief Engineer, Dakshin Bihar Upbhag, Building Construction Department, Bishwasaraiya Bhawan, Patna.

3. The Superintending Engineer, Building Construction and Housing Department, Gaya.

4. The Executive Engineer, Building Division, Aurangabad.

5. The Junior Engineer, Building Division, Aurangabad.

6. The Assistant Engineer, Building Division, Aurangabad.

7. The District Magistrate, Aurangabad.

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Dinesh Maharaj, AC to AAG -11 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 08-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been taken up out of turn on the request of learned counsel for the petitioner for disposal of the same with a direction to the respondents to pay the admitted dues of the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite having constructed the Helipad and having done the Barricading work as required in terms of the letter no. 2354/Go dated 01.10.2014 issued by the Executive Engineer, Building Division, Aurangabad, the petitioner has yet to be paid for the work done despite the bill of Rs. 3,49,807/- having already been passed as far back as on 09.10.2014 (Annexure-3)

4. Learned counsel for the respondents appears and has

Patna High Court CWJC No.16256 of 2017 dt.08-01-2018 2/2 been heard.

5. Having regard to the nature of the grievances of the petitioner and with consent of the parties this writ petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Executive Engineer, Building Division, Aurangabad (Respondent No. 4) with a fresh representation for redressal of his grievances. If any such representation is filed within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of, ensuring payment to the extent found due to the petitioner, within a period of six weeks from the date of receiving the petitioner's representation. Any delay in payment of the admitted amount beyond the stipulated period as stated above, shall entitle the petitioner to receive payment together with simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the admitted dues calculated from the date when the amount became due till the date of its actual payment. In case the petitioner's claim is found inadmissible, whether in whole or in part, the petitioner's representation shall be disposed of by a speaking order in that regard.

6. It is made clear that this Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 09.01.2018 Transmission Date N.A.