Vijay Gedam v. Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 6270 of 2017

1. Vijay Gedam S/o Late Shri Rai Bahan Gedam Aged About 53 Years R/o Ambedkar Nagar, Magarpara Chowk, Police Station Civil Line, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh

2. Rajesh Humne S/o Late Shri Shankar Rao Humne Aged About 53 Years R/o Ambedkar Nagar, Magarpara Chowk, Police Station Civil Line, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

3. Basant Pandey S/o Shri Punanand Pandey Aged About 53 Years R/o Deendayal Colony, L I G 162, Post Mangla, Police Station Civil Line, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited Through Managing Director, Head Office Shastri Chowk, Raipur Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh

2. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Director Local Fund, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Recovery Officer Department Of Finance Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Shri Lav Sharma, Advocate For Respondent No.1 :

Shri Anup Majumdar, Advocate S.B. Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 25/01/2018

1. At the outset, learned counsel for respondent No.1 would submit that the petitioners have filed this petition on an apprehension that respondent would be proceeding to make any recovery against the petitioners on the basis of

-2communication dated 19.7.2017 (Annexure P-1), which is unfounded.

2. In the communication of the State Government, there is no direction for making any recovery and the respondent No.1 has also not taken any such decision to make any recovery against the petitioners.

3. In view of the submission made by learned counsel for respondent No.1, petition of the petitioners appears to be on apprehension of recovery though there is no decision taken by respondent No.1 to order any recovery against the petitioners. Therefore, at this stage, the petition is disposed off with liberty to the petitioners to revive in case any recovery notice is given to the petitioners by respondent No.1.

Sd/-- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Praveen