Disposed

Wahid Khan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC15 Apr 2019WRIC/13004/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition seeking directions for the payment of outstanding dues to a registered contractor. The petitioners promised to file an afresh representation for a decision within three months. The court explicitly disclaimed any opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation, to be decided expeditiously within three months.

Wahid Khan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 13004 of 2019 Petitioner :- Wahid Khan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Lakshman Singh,Lakshman Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶5

The petition has been filed for following reliefs :-

¶6

(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.3 to consider the payment of the petitioner regarding the dues claim and also decide the representation dated 27.11.2018 pending before the respondents.

¶7

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider and decide the representation dated 27.11.2018 pending before the respondents.

¶8

(iii) issue any other suitable writ, order, direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper under the circumstances of the present case.

¶9

(iv) to award the costs of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner is a registered Contractor in Irrigation/P.W.D. Department, who has carried out the work allotted through tender/work order from the year 2005-06 to 2014-15 but the payment for the work done by him has not been paid to him. The total outstanding amount against the Department is said to be Rs.9,82,688/-.

¶11

In this connection, petitioner moved the representation 27.11.2018, before the respondents, which is still pending.

¶12

In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner shall move representation afresh before the respondents, In case, representation is filed within 15 days from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, the same shall be decided by the respondents, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months.

¶13

None of the observations made above shall be construed as opinion on the merits of the case.

¶14

Order Date :- 15.4.2019 Rishabh

Wahid Khan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Wahid Khan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Gitti Baloo Vyavsai Kalyan Samiti Vs State of U.P. and Others

Ganga Prasad Singh Vs Union Bank of India

Anurag Varshney Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Deepak Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Savitri and Another Vs State of U.P. and 9 Others