Sayyed Rajjak Ali v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 867 of 2020 Sayyed Rajjak Ali S/o Sayyed Maqsood Ali Aged About 35 Years Proprietor Suraksha Solution, Shop No. 3, Ambe Business Centre, Infront Of Lic Office, Magarpara Road, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Excise Department, Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Managing Director Cum Excise Commissioner Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Collector Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

4. Assistant Commissioner Excise Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

5. Deputy General Manager Excise, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

6. Deputy General Manager Excise, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

7. Deputy General Manager Chhattisgarh State Marketing Cooperation Limited, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ---Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Sumit Singh Rathore, Adv.

For State : Shri Abhyunnati Singh, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 06/03/2020

1. The limited prayer that the petitioner has sought in the present writ petition is for an appropriate direction to the respondents No. 2 & 5 to consider the representation of the petitioner in respect of the pending bills and the releasing of the security amount which the petitioner had given while accepting tender floated by the respondent, so far as installation and maintenance of CCTV Camera and other equipments are concerned.

2. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that after all negotiation between the parties, the amount payable to the petitioner has now been finalized as 11,60,720/- which also the respondents have till date not considered. They have neither decided the representation of the

petitioner pending before the authorities concerned since long.

3. Counsel for the State submits that out of 11,60,720/-, 3,60,000/- has been paid to the petitioner, the balance of 8,00,000/- is left for being released. The limited prayer/representation that the petitioner has made to the respondents No. 2 & 5 be decided at the earliest and also his claim be settled promptly.

4. To the limited prayer that the petitioner has made, the State Counsel does not oppose.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents No. 2 & 5 to take an appropriate decision on the claim of the petitioner so far as his unpaid admitted bills are concerned and the said bills be settled/decided at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Jyotijha