R.D. sharma Vs M.P.S.R.T. Corporation And Anr.

¶1

1 / 3

¶2

2024:CGHC:32510

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 3431 of 2013

¶6

1 - R.D. Sharma S/o Lt Shri V.P.Sharma Aged About 71 Years R/o Vaishali Nagar, Ps Tarbahar, Bilaspur, Civil And Revenue Distt Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - M.P.S.R.T. Corporation And Anr. S/o Now C.G. Infrastructure Development Corporation Transport Sector, Through Its Managing Director, Raipur, Distt Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

2 - The Divisional Officer C.G. Infrastructure Development Corporation, Division Officer Raipur, Distt Raipur, Cg

¶11

... Respondents

¶12

(Cause-title taken from the Case Information System)

¶13

For Petitioner :- Ms. Pooja Lunia, Advocate For Respondent:- Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Advocate

¶14

SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board

¶15

27.08.2024

¶16

1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the inaction of the respondent authorities in paying the remaining interest amount to the petitioner, for which he is entitled.

¶17

2 / 3

¶18

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled for payment of interest amount for the period from 31.11.2000 to 02.12.2002, as implicated by order dated 18.03.2013 (Annexure P/1) passed by this Court in WPS No.6338/2005.

¶19

3. Learned Counsel for the respondent would submit that the interest amount has partly been awarded to the petitioner in accordance with law, however, the representation of the petitioner for payment of interest amount for the remaining period has been rejected by impugned order dated 24.06.2013 (Annexure P/2), which is just and proper.

¶20

4. In pursuant to order of this Court dated 18.03.2013, the representation of the petitioner has been rejected on the following grounds :-

¶21

" माननीयउच्चन्यायालय, बि�लासपुरनेयाचि�काकमांक 690/ 2001 श्रीआर 0 डी0 शमा�बि�रूद्धमध्यप्रदेशराज्यसड़कपरिर�हन बिनगमसेबिदनांक 10.12.2001 कोआदेशपारिरतकरसे�ाबिन�ृत लाभग्रेड-एक�दोकोरूपये 5000/- ए�ंग्रेडतीनए�ं�ारको रूपये 3000/- प्रचितमाहभुगतानकरनेकाआदेशबिदयागया, जि,सकेपालनमेंमध्यप्रदेशराज्यसड़कपरिर�हनबिनगमद्वाराआपको प्रचितमाह 3000 /- (तीनह,ाररूपये) बिदसम्�र 2002 तकबिकया गया।

¶22

बिदनांक 31.12.2002 कोमध्यप्रदेशराज्यसड़कपरिर�हनबिनगम काबि�घटनहो,ानेकेकारण,न�री 2003 सेभुगतानकरना�न्द हो गया। आपको से�ाबिन�ृत लाभ की शेष राशिश रूपये 1,60,637 /- (एकलाखसाठह,ार, छःसौसैतीसरूपये) का भुगतानबिदनांक 11.05.2004 कोसीआईडीसीद्वाराबिकया,ा �ुकाहै।उक्तराशिशकाभुगतान 01 �ष� 04 माहबि�लम्�होनेसेहै। माननीयउच्चन्यायालयकेआदेशपालनमें 18 प्रचितशतब्या, बिदनांक 01.01.03 सेअंचितमभुगतानबिदनांक 11.05.04 तक

¶23

3 / 3

¶24

कुल 38,552 /- (अड़तीसह,ारपां�सौ�ा�न) �ेककमांक 260622 बिदनांक 19.04.07 केद्वाराआपकोभुगतानबिकया,ा �ुकाहै।न्यायालयद्वारासे�ाबिन�ृचितबिदनांकसेब्या, राशिशभुगतान काआदेशनहींबिदयागयाहै।इसलिलयेउक्तअ�चिD काब्या, पानेका अचिDकारीनहींहै।पू��भुगतानकेअचितरिरक्तऔरकोईराशिशभुगतान हेतुशेषनहींहै। "

¶25

5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the materials available on record, I am of the considered opinion that the reasons recorded by the respondent authorities for not granting the amount of interest to the petitioner for the remaining period is proper and in accordance with law.

¶26

6. As such, I do not find any merit in this writ petition. It deserves to be and is accordingly, dismissed.

¶27

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

¶28

@d!t!

R.D. sharma v. M.P.S.R.T. Corporation And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.D. sharma v. M.P.S.R.T. Corporation And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devi Prasad Vs the State of M.P.

Pardesilal Vs Nirabai

Smt. Sandhya Thakur Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Mangadu Podiyami Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Premnath Kamlesh Vs Guru Ghasidas Vishwavidyalaya, Bilaspur

Smt. Phool Kumari Vs K.G.Radha Krishna (Died) through Lrs