Disposed

Chhabra Agencies Jalgaon through Its Proprietor Vinay Laxman Chaudhari and Others v. the State of Maharashtra Trough Its Secretary and Others

Bombay HC19 Aug 2023WP/4240/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition seeking release of unpaid dues for Covid-19 medicines and surgical equipment supplied by petitioners. The court directed authorities to verify bills within 60 days and clear admissible amounts within 30 days thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Verified bills within 60 days; uncontroverted admissible amounts cleared within 30 days.

Chhabra Agencies Jalgaon through Its Proprietor Vinay… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

901wp4240o23

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.4240 OF 2023

¶5

1.	Chhabra Agencies, Jalgaon. Through its Proprietor Vinay Laxman Chaudhari, Age : 38 years, Occ : Business, R/o Plot No.29, Opp. Gold City Hospital, Pimparala Road, Jalgaon.
2.	R.K. Pharmaceutical @ Distributors, Latur through its Proprietor, Amar Manavendra Kendre, Age : 32 years, Occ : Business, R/o Plot No.12, Pati Chicholiraowadi, Behind Navoday School, Latur.
3.	Tanushree Surgical, Nagpur. Through its Proprietor Prafulla Thakurdas Sawal, Age : 48 years, Occ : Business, R/o H.No.200/A, Ward No.33, Old Jailkhana Road, Ganji Peth, Nagpur.
4.	Mahalaxmi Trading Company, Nagpur through its Proprietor, Manju Prafulla Sawal, Age : 44 years, Occ : Business, R/o Flat No.109, Jay Laxmi Society, Telephone Exchange, Nagpur.
5.	Chandak Medical Stores, Chandrapur, Through its Proprietor Dilip Radhakishan Chandak, Age : 65 years, Occ : Business, R/o M No.226, Room No.123, First Floor, Jatpura Gate, Chandrapur.

2 901wp4240o23

...PETITIONERS

-VERSUS-

The State of Maharashtra. Through its Secretary, Health Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

¶10

The Director of Health, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad.

¶11

The Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Parbhani, Tq. & Dist. Parbhani.

¶12

The Collector, Parbhani.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioners : Shri S.S. Gangakhedkar i/by Shri Deshmukh Mahesh S.

¶15

AGP for the Respondents/State : Shri P.K. Lakhotiya

¶16

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &

¶17

Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.

¶18

DATE :- 19^th August, 2023

¶19

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.) :-

¶20

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard

¶21

finally by the consent of the parties.

¶22

The Petitioners have put forth prayer clause B as

901wp4240o23

under:-

“B) By an order of this Hon’ble Court, the respondents may kindly be directed to disburse payment of the unpaid amount as per the invoices (Exhibit-C collectively).”

¶27

The Petitioners are before us praying for releasing of

¶28

their legal dues/ payments towards the bills for supply of Covid19 medicines as well as surgical equipment during the Covid period. These bills have been purportedly raised towards the medicines and surgical equipment that were supplied for combating the Covid-19 pandemic.

¶29

Shri Gangakhedkar, the learned Advocate for the Petitioners, has vehemently supported the prayers put forth in the light of the grounds formulated in the petition.

¶30

In similar matters, wherein the bills were admitted, we have directed the release of the said bills. The learned AGP submits that these bills cannot be cleared without proper verification.

¶31

In view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed off with the following directions:-

¶32

(a) The Respondent Authorities would verify the bills of these Petitioners within a period of sixty days from today.

¶33

4 901wp4240o23

¶34

(b) Those amounts, which are admissible and are

¶35

uncontroverted, would be cleared within thirty days thereafter.

¶36

(c) If there are any amounts/ bills on which there is any objection, Respondent No.3 shall communicate to the respective Petitioners about such bills not being cleared. In such situation, the Petitioners would be at liberty to resort to filing of a recovery suit, subject to the law of limitation that is applicable.

¶37

Rule is discharged.

¶38

kps (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )

Chhabra Agencies Jalgaon through Its Proprietor Vinay Laxman Chaudhari and Others v. the State of Maharashtra Trough Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhabra Agencies Jalgaon through Its Proprietor Vinay Laxman Chaudhari and Others v. the State of Maharashtra Trough Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kiran Kashinath Avhad Vs the State of through Its Principal Secretary and Others

Baburao Nagorao Gadade and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Maya Gopal Sable Vs Gopal Haridas Sable

Anjali Atul Rajput Vs Atul Abhijit Rajput

M/S Jaykumar Fulchand Ajmera through Its Partner Rajkumar Jaykumar Ajmera Vs the State of Maharashtra through the District Collector and Others

The State of Maharashtra Thr the Collector Osmanabad and Ors. Vs M/S Jaykumar Fulchand Ajmera Thr Its Partner Rajkumar Jaykumar Ajmera