Disposed

Vishwambhar Nath Gupta v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC24 Jun 2019WRIC/20564/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a mandamus directing payment of pending B.R.G.F. scheme dues. The petition was disposed of by consent with a direction to raise grievances via fresh representation to the Executive Engineer within 15 days for a decision within one month, without adjudication on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent-4 to consider fresh representation from petitioner within 15 days and decide on payment within one month.

Vishwambhar Nath Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 37

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20564 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Vishwambhar Nath Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Harish Chandra Singh,Namit Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Harish Chandra Singh for the petitioner and Standing Counsel for the State - respondents.

¶6

The petitioner has made the following prayer:-

¶7

i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent -5 to forthwith release 10% of the amount in respect of projects of Nagar Palika Parishad, Karwi for the financial year 2012-13 and 2013-14 under Backward Region Grant Fund Scheme (in short B.R.G.F. Schemes) completed by the petitioner and further the respondent-4 be directed to forthwith make full and complete payment of bills of the work done by the petitioner as disclosed in paragraph 9 of the writ petition.

¶8

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no. 4 to pass appropriate order on the representation of the petitioner dated 19.3.2019 (Annexure No. 4) to the writ petition.

¶9

According to the petitioner, an amount of Rs. 632995/- and Rs. 588701/- is due to him as per representation filed as Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition.

¶10

No useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending. The writ petition is, therefore , disposed of with the consent of learned counsel for the parties with the direction that if the petitioner prefers a fresh representation before the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division - I, Karwi, Chitrakoot (the respondent no. 4), raising all his grievances as raised in the present writ petition, within a period of 15 days from today, along with a certified copy of this order, the respondent no. 4 shall consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, within a further period of one month, and if the amount is due to be paid to the petitioner, the same shall be paid to him within the same period of time.

¶11

It is made clear that the Court has not adjudicated the claim of the petitioner on merit.

¶12

Order Date :- 24.6.2019 Rahul Dwivedi/-

Vishwambhar Nath Gupta v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishwambhar Nath Gupta v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Musharrat Fatima and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Savita Devi Vs Central Bank of India and 2 Others

M/S Ai-Shabez Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others