Disposed

Akaank Water Suppliers Through Its Proprietors Chandra Shekhar v. The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Jharkhand HC3 Dec 2018WPC/6967/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking payment for drinking water supply services rendered during a shortage in 2015, granting liberty to file a fresh representation with a duty to decide within three months.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to prefer a fresh representation with the respondent No.3 to decide on payment after hearing within three months.

Akaank Water Suppliers Through Its Proprietors… — Writ and Judicial Review | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 6967 of 2016

¶3

Akaank Water Suppliers, Palamau at Daltonganj, through its proprietor, Chandra Shekhar ….. Petitioner

¶4

….. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

The Deputy Commissioner, Palamau

¶8

The Deputy Development Commissioner, Palamau

¶9

Alok Kumar Chaurasia ….. Respondents

¶10

¶11

CORAM

¶12

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶13

¶14

For the Petitioner: Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha For the State: Ms. Richa Sanchita, S.C-V

¶15

¶16

05/03.12.2018 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to forthwith make payment of the bills amounting to Rs.42,53,893/- submitted by the petitioner with respect to supply of drinking water during the summer season in the year 2015 i.e. from 03.04.2015 to 03.07.2015 at different places falling under Daltonganj Assembly Constituency No. 76.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the summer season of the year 2015, there was acute shortage of drinking water in the district of Palamau. Various Panchayat Samities and villagers represented the local MLA for providing drinking water through water tankers in the affected areas. Under the said emergent situation, the respondent No.4, who is an M.L.A of Daltonganj Assembly Constituency No. 76, directed the petitioner vide letter No. 105 dated 31.03.2015, to supply drinking water through water tankers in the affected areas. Accordingly, the petitioner supplied drinking water at various places by engaging the water tankers and labourers. After completion of the said work, the petitioner submitted the bill of Rs.42,53,893/- to the office of the respondent No.3 with the recommendation of the respondent No.4. However, the petitioner has not been made any payment with respect to the said work done by it.

¶18

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and looking to the nature of the writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer a fresh representation raising its claim before the

¶19

respondent No.3. On receipt of such representation, the respondent No.3, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner’s representative, shall pass appropriate order in accordance with law, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the said representation.

¶20

The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction.

¶21

(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)

¶22

Satish/-

Akaank Water Suppliers Through Its Proprietors Chandra Shekhar v. The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akaank Water Suppliers Through Its Proprietors Chandra Shekhar v. The State Of Jharkhand And 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

Rameshwar Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Laksham Prasad Baranwal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Balbhadra Das Vs Collectariate

Ayodhya Ram And Ors. Vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Dtv Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Radhey Shyam Singh And Ors. Vs Co. Operative