Disposed

Krishnendu Kar v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Calcutta HC20 Jan 2021WPA/7098/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner sought directions for the timely clearance of unpaid bills related to government work. The court disposed of the petition by directing the Executive Officer to consider the representation within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Executive Officer to consider the petitioner's representation within eight weeks, afford a hearing, and pass a reasoned order.

Krishnendu Kar Vs State of West Bengal & Ors. — Service and Employment | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

20.01.2021 SL No.32 Court No.24 (P.M.)

WPA 7098 of 2019

Krishnendu Kar

Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶6

Mr. Gautam Narayan Bhattacharya … for the petitioner

¶7

Mr. Shamimul Bari … for the State

¶8

The petitioner claims that a work order was issued in his favour for the purpose of construction of RCC Slab culvert in the year 2016. The petitioner further claims that he had performed the work satisfactorily and raised bills in respect of the work performed by him.

¶9

He alleges that the bills raised by him were not cleared by the respondent authorities. No reason whatsoever has also been communicated to the petitioner for non-releasing the aforesaid bills.

¶10

The petitioner made representation before the Executive Officer of Bagdah Panchayet Samity, North 24 Parganas on repeated occasions but none of his representations have also been considered by the respondents.

¶11

None appears on behalf of the Panchayet Samity despite service.

¶12

As it appears that the petitioner has already raised his grievances before the Panchayet Samity and the same

¶13

¶14

has not been redressed by the said authority, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the writ petition pending.

¶15

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of by directing the respondent No. 4 being the Executive Officer of Bagdah Panchayet Samity to take steps for consideration of the representation made by the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of a copy of this order. The said respondent shall afford the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner immediately thereafter.

¶16

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the claim of the petitioner and all points are left open to be decided by the said respondent at the time of consideration of the representation made by the petitioner.

¶17

WPA 7098 of 2019 stands disposed of.

¶18

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on completion of usual formalities.

¶19

( Amrita Sinha, J.)

Krishnendu Kar v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnendu Kar v. State of West Bengal & 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

Md. Issa Hussain Vs the Kolkata Munucipal Corporation Others

Prasanta Sen Vs the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Rajat Suvra Seal Vs the Kolkata Municipal Cor Poration and Others

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.