Disposed

Ranjan Mal & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Calcutta HC21 Jan 2021WPA/338/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Supreme Court directed the District Magistrate, Birbhum, to ensure disbursement of Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana funds to eligible petitioners strictly following the priority list sequence within ten weeks, noting grievances over delayed redressal.

What did the court decide?

Direction to District Magistrate, Birbhum to consider the representation and disburse funds in accordance with the priority list within ten weeks.

Ranjan Mal & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors. — Public Procurement and Tenders | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

48 21.01.2021 . d.p.

¶2

W.P.A 338 of 2020 (Via Video Conference)

¶3

Ranjan Mal & Ors. -versus

¶4

Union of India & Ors.

¶5

Mr. Saikat Chatterjee. …For the Petitioners.

¶6

Ms. Sima Adhikari, Ms. Kakali Naskar. …For the State.

¶7

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today is taken on record.

¶8

The petitioners claim that they are entitled to receive funds under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana. The primary contention of the petitioners is that the funds have been released in favour of the beneficiaries not in accordance with the priority in which their names have been enlisted. It has been categorically submitted that the candidates whose names appear at the bottom of the list have been allotted the funds earlier than those whose names appear at the top of the list.

¶9

The petitioners raised an objection before the Block Development Officer, Mayureswar-I Development Block.

¶10

It appears from the record that the SubDivisional Officer, Rampurhat, Birbhum by a communication dated 22^nd October, 2019 forwarded a copy of the petition to the Block Development Officer,

¶11

¶12

Mayureswar-I Development Block for redressal of the grievances of the petitioners under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana.

¶13

The petitioners submit that since thereafter there has been no communication from the end of the respondent authorities.

¶14

It has however, been submitted in Court that after filing of the writ petition and service of a copy of the same upon the respondents, steps are being taken for releasing funds in favour of selected number of petitioners. The first and the second installments have been released in favour of few of them but the last and the final installment has not been disbursed. It has also been submitted that there are number of petitioners who have not received a single installment till date.

¶15

The learned advocate appearing for the State respondents is yet to receive the instruction in the matter.

¶16

As it appears that the respondent authorities are already aware of the petition filed by the petitioners and the same has been forwarded by the Sub-Divisional Officer to the Block Development Officer, Mayureswar-I Development Block, the Court think it fit to direct the respondent No. 3 being the District Magistrate, Birbhum to take necessary steps to consider the representation that was made by the petitioners, strictly in accordance with the relevant scheme, within a period of ten weeks from the date of communication of a copy of this order.

¶17

The said respondent shall ensure that payments are disbursed in favour of the eligible beneficiaries in

¶18

¶19

accordance with the sequence of the names as appearing in the priority list.

¶20

The learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits upon instruction that the petitioner No. 8, Ganesh Konai son of Amulya Konai has expired during the pendency of the writ petition. Accordingly, the name of the petitioner No. 8 stands expunged from the cause title of the writ petition.

¶21

W.P.A. 338 of 2020 is disposed of.

¶22

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.

¶23

( Amrita Sinha, J.)

Ranjan Mal & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjan Mal & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

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

Ganesh Mondal Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Prabir Paladhi and 3 Others Vs the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and 8 Others

Mahitesh Sardar Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Netai Das @ Ruidas Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Ahmmed Ali Laskar & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Jugal Denre Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.