Jagatguru Shikshan And Samaj Kalyan Samiti v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4592 of 2019 Jagatguru Shikshan And Samaj Kalyan Samiti Through Its President Laxmi Prasad Yadav S/o Leeladhar Yadav, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Lodhipara, Sarkanda, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Collector District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.

3. The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Mungeli, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.

4. The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Patharia, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.

5. Project Director District Rural Development Agency, Mungeli, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.

6. The Union Of India Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Labour, Directorate General Of Employment And Training, New Delhi. ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. H.S. Patel, Advocate For State :

Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dy. A.G.

For Respondent No.6 :

Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 16/12/2019

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking for an appropriate writ/direction to the respondents to forthwith release the bills submitted by the petitioner towards the payment and other expenses incurred by the petitioner in the course of imparting training of skill development under the 'Mukhyamantri Kaushal Vikas Yojnantargat'.

2. According to the petitioner, they were also selected as an agency, which could impart training under the aforementioned 'Mukhyamantri Kaushal Vikas Yojnantargat' and the petitioner has successfully imparted training to large number of trainees and examinations were

also conducted. That, in terms of the agreement, the petitioner had submitted his bills regularly, however only part payment has been made to the petitioner. Thereafter the respondents have not either considered the claim of the petitioner, nor have they cleared any of the pending bills. The petitioner has also made several representations in this regard, which too have till date not been decided by the concerned authorities.

3. The counsel appearing for the respondents on the contrary submits that the payments claimed by the petitioner can only be released after due verification of fact as regards imparting of training and the number of trainees, who have undertaken the training etc. and the petitioner's representations that he has made would be considered on its merit in accordance with law.

4. Given the said submissions by the counsel appearing for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would meet if the writ petition itself is disposed of with a direction to the respondents No.2 to 5 to consider the representations, so far as the release of the unpaid bills, which the petitioner has made pursuant to the agreement with the respondents against the training, which the petitioner has imparted to the trainees under the 'Mukhyamantri Kaushal Vikas Yojnantargat'.

5. In the event, if the petitioner is found entitled for any dues, the same be immediately processed and released, however, in case if the authorities find that the petitioner is not entitled for the claim that he has put forth, the respondents should decide his representations by

a speaking order giving reasons as to why he is not entitled for the same.

6. Let this exercise be completed at the earliest preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

7. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved