Partly allowed

T.Ahilan v. The District Collector

Madras HC12 Sept 2023WP/1375/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order dismissed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking payment of outstanding dues for supplies. The court directed the first respondent to pay the undisputed balance of Rs.14,29,715 within twelve weeks but allowed the petitioner to work out the remedy for the disputed portion.

What did the court decide?

First respondent directed to pay undisputed sum of Rs.14,29,715 within twelve weeks; dispute resolved for petitioner to work other remedy.

T.Ahilan Vs The District Collector — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.1375 of 2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 12.09.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

¶6

W.P.No.1375 of 2020

T.Ahilan

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The District Collector, Ariyalur District, Ariyalur.

¶11

2.The Special Officer / Block Development Officer (Scheme), Jayamkondam Union Panchayat, Ariyalur District.

¶12

3.The Special Officer / Block Development Officer (Scheme), Aandimadam Union Panchayat, Ariyalur District.

¶13

4.The Special Officer / Block Development Officer (Scheme), T.Palur Union Panchayat, Ariyalur District.

¶14

5.The Special Officer / Block Development Officer (Scheme), Senthurai Union Panchayat, Ariyalur District.

¶15

... Respondents

¶16

1/6

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

W.P.No.1375 of 2020

¶19

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay the outstanding amount sum of Rs.1,61,45,721/- for the materials supplied by the petitioner by considering his representation of the petitioner dated 09.12.2019.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Balu

¶21

For R1 : Mr.R.U.Dinesh Rajkumar Additional Government Pleader

¶22

For R2, R3 and R5 : No Appearance

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to pay

¶25

the outstanding amount of Rs.1,61,45,721/- f or the materials supplied by the

¶26

petitioner by considering his representation dated 09.12.2019.

¶27

According to the petitioner, he supplied various materials to the

¶28

respondents 2 to 5 on specific demand made by the 2^nd respondent and raised invoice. Though the respondents 2 to 5 received the materials supplied by the petitioner and the value of the same has not been paid to the

¶29

2/6

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

W.P.No.1375 of 2020

¶32

petitioner and therefore, the petitioner was constrained to file the present writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to pay the above said amount.

¶33

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that a portion of the amount has already been paid by the respondents 2 to 5 and a sum of Rs.16,28,434/alone need to be paid by the respondents 2 to 5.

¶34

Mr.R.U.Dinesh Rajkumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the 1^st respondent, on instructions submitted that there is a dispute with regard to Rs.73,302/- and the remaining sum of Rs.14,29,715/need to be paid to the petitioner. The learned Additional Government Pleader also seeks twelve weeks time for payment of the undisputed balance amount to the petitioner.

¶35

In view of the specific stand taken by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the 1^st respondent, the 1^st respondent is directed to take steps to pay the undisputed balance amount of

¶36

3/6

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

W.P.No.1375 of 2020

¶39

Rs.14,29,715/- to the petitioner as early as possible preferably within a

¶40

period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶41

As far as the disputed portion of the amount is concerned, it is for

¶42

the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law.

¶43

With the above direction and observation, the writ petition stands

¶44

disposed of. No costs.

¶45

12.09.2023

¶46

Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No dm

¶47

4/6

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶49

W.P.No.1375 of 2020

¶50

¶51

1.The District Collector, Ariyalur District, Ariyalur.

¶52

2.The Special Officer / Block Development Officer (Scheme), Jayamkondam Union Panchayat, Ariyalur District.

¶53

3.The Special Officer / Block Development Officer (Scheme), Aandimadam Union Panchayat, Ariyalur District.

¶54

4.The Special Officer /

¶55

Block Development Officer (Scheme), T.Palur Union Panchayat, Ariyalur District.

¶56

5.The Special Officer /

¶57

Block Development Officer (Scheme), Senthurai Union Panchayat, Ariyalur District.

¶58

5/6

¶59

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.1375 of 2020

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

W.P.No.1375 of 2020

¶64

12.09.2023

¶65

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶66

6/6

T.Ahilan v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Ahilan v. The District Collector

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

R.Srinivasan Vs The Commissioner

B.v.Sridhar Battachar Vs The Assistant Commissioner / Executive officer

Venkataraman Vs The Commissioner

Jothi Raja.K Vs The Principal Secretary/Member Secretary

R.Jothi Vs the Joint Commissioner -I

T.M.Krishnamoorthy Vs The Erumapalayam Panchayat