Disposed

Arss Infrastructure Projects Ltd. v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC3 Mar 2017WP(C)/18951/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by a railway contractor seeking refund of illegally deducted royalty. Court directed petitioner to file a comprehensive representation to East Coast Railways invoking an earlier judgment, with a decision to be made expeditiously and refund within four months if due.

What did the court decide?

Directed opposite party to file reasoned order on representation within four months; refund if entitled.

Arss Infrastructure Projects Ltd. Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2017)

¶1

 W.P.(C) No. 18951 of 2015

¶2

 02. 03.03.2017 Heard Mr. S.Dwibedi, learned counsel for the petitioner as wel
l as Mr. B.P.Pradhan, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the State-opposite parti
es and Mr. D.K.Sahoo, learned counsel for the opposite party-Railways and perused the record.
 2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is
 disposed of without calling for counter affidavit.

¶3

 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a contractor working wit
h East Coast Railways. It carried out supply and delivery work for which it has been paid the
amount after deduction of royalty. It is contended that deduction of such royalty at the rate,
 which it has been deducted, has been declared to be illegal by the judgment of this Court dat
ed 18.3.2015 passed in W.P.(C) No. 11830 of 2013 and other connected writ petitions. It is co
ntended that the petitioner would also be entitled to the benefit of the said judgment.

¶4

 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we dispose of this petiti
on directing that in case, with regard to the grievance made in this petition, the petitioner
files a comprehensive representation before opposite party no.5 along with a certified copy of
 this order and annexing the judgment of this Court dated 18.3.2015, referred to above, the sa
me shall be considered and decided in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order as
expeditiously as possible. It is further directed that in case the petitioner is entitled to r
efund of the same, the same shall be made within a period of four months of such decision.
 Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

¶5

 .......
 ( VINEET SARAN )
 CHIEF JUSTICE
 ....
 ( DR. B.R. SARANGI )
JUDGE
dm

¶6

-2-

Arss Infrastructure Projects Ltd. v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arss Infrastructure Projects Ltd. v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar Behera Vs State of Orissa

L.K.Sahu Vs State

B.D.Mohta Transport Vs O.M.C.

M/S.Executive Security Service Pvt.Ltd. Vs Superintendent,Svp Post Graduate Institute of PEDIATRICS,CUTTACK-2

Arss Infrastructure Projects Ltd. Vs State of Odisha

Arss Infrastructure Projects Ltd. Vs State of Odisha