Prem Kumar v. State Of Punjab And ORS

CWP No.13043 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

CWP No.13043 of 2016 Date of Decision : 8.7.2016 Prem Kumar, Govt. Contractor ......Petitioner Vs.

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents ...

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK ...

Present :

Mr. Bharat Julka, Advocate for Mr. R.K. Girdhar, Advocate for the petitioner.

...

1. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

2. Whether the judgement should be reported in Digest ? RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK, J Feeling aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of respondent authorities, petitioner has approached this court by way of instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the genuine grievance of the petitioner was not being redressed by the respondent authorities, he finally approached the respondent authorities by way of self contained legal notice dated 30.5.2016 (Annexure P-2), but the same is also pending decision. He further submits that the petitioner will be satisfied in case respondent no.2 is directed to consider and decide the legal notice of the petitioner, within a reasonable time. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and without GREESH SAHNI 2016.07.12 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.13043 of 2016 expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, including the issue of limitation, if any, Chief Engineer (South), Water Supply & Sanitation Department, Patiala-respondent no.2 is directed to look into the matter, consider the grievance of the petitioner raised in his legal notice dated 30.5.2016 (Annexure P-2) and decide the same at an early date, by passing an appropriate order thereon, strictly in accordance with law, but in any case within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is further directed that if after due consideration of the matter, respondent no.2 comes to the conclusion that the petitioner is entitled for the amount being sought to be released, the same shall be released in favour of the petitioner, without any further loss of time. With the above said observations made and directions issued, instant writ petition stands disposed of.

8.7.2016 (RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) GS JUDGE GREESH SAHNI 2016.07.12 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh