Disposed

M/S Babu Ram Construction Thru. Proprietor Shri Chandra Chaudhary v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Irrigation Water Resources Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 Dec 2024WRIC/9982/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court observed the respondent officer's failure to comply promptly with a previous directive requiring instructions. The court ordered the Executive Engineer to appear in person to explain the four-week delay in preparing instructions.

What did the court decide?

Officer required to appear on 17.12.2024 to explain delay; order communicated to officials and Superintendent.

M/S Babu Ram Construction Thru. Proprietor Shri… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9982 of 2024 Petitioner :- M/S Babu Ram Construction Thru. Proprietor Shri Chandra Chaudhary Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Irrigation Water Resources Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Uttam Kumar Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶4

On 22.11.2024, we had passed the following order :-

¶5

"The petitioner seeks payment of certain dues for the work done by it. It is alleged that 52 agreements were entered into between the parties in pursuance to which work was performed. The superintendent Engineer has written for payment of dues as claimed.

¶6

Be that as it may, let the Standing Counsel seek instructions from the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 as regards the claim of the petitioner. This is without prejudice to the objection with respect to the maintainability of this petition which may be raised by the opposite parties.

¶7

List this matter on 12.12.2024 as fresh."

¶8

Today, learned Standing Counsel says that he has received instructions from the Executive Engineer, Flood Section, Balrampur, District Balrampur dated 09.12.2024 wherein it has been stated that to prepare and provide instructions to the learned Standing Counsel four weeks time is required.

¶9

Prima facie, the Officer appears to be treating the orders of this Court in a leisurely manner instead of responding promptly as 20 days' have passed since we passed the earlier order. It should have been sufficient for sending proper instructions.

¶10

Let the said Officer appear before this Court on 17.12.2024 and explain as to why he requires four weeks' time just to prepare the instructions to be given to the Standing Counsel especially in view of our query dated 22.11.2024.

¶11

List on 17.12.2024.

¶12

Order within 24 hours.

¶13

Shri Shailesh Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel shall communicate the order to both the concerned officials.

¶14

Copy of this order be also send to the Superintendent Engineer who supervises his work.

¶15

Order Date :- 12.12.2024 Pks

¶16

[Brij Raj Singh,J.] [Rajan Roy, J.]

¶17

Digitally signed by :- POOJA SETH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

M/S Babu Ram Construction Thru. Proprietor Shri Chandra Chaudhary v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Irrigation Water Resources Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Babu Ram Construction Thru. Proprietor Shri Chandra Chaudhary v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Irrigation Water Resources Lko 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sanjeev Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 5 Others

Badkannu @ Mohd. Juver vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 13 Others

Raj Narayan and 19 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Public Works Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 24 Others

X Rape Victim Crime No. 007 of 2022 P.S. Inhauna Amethi Thru Her Father/Informant vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Kumud Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko and 4 Others

C/M Sishu Ghyan Vatika Ucchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Thru. Manager Neeru Agnihotri, Rae Bareli vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Industrial Development, Lucknow and 3 Others