Disposed

M/S D.K.Engineering and Construction v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC25 Feb 2022WP(C)/34046/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition but directed the opposite parties to consider the petitioner's representation regarding the refund of excess royalty and interest within four months, directing a refund or adjustment within six weeks if entitlement is found.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; direction to consider representation within four weeks; direction to refund or adjust amount within six weeks if petitioner is entitled.

M/S D.K.Engineering and Construction Vs… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P (C) No. 34046 of 2021

¶3

M/s D.K. Engineering and Construction

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr. S.K. Sanganeria, Adv.

¶6

Vs.

¶7

State of Odisha and others

¶8

Opposite parties

¶9

State Counsel

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

¶12

MR. JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

¶13

ORDER

¶14

25.02.2022

¶15

Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 01.

¶16

Order No.

¶17

Heard Mr. S.K. Sanganeria, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T.K. Pattanayak, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties.

¶18

The petitioner in this writ petition seeks for a direction to the Opposite Parties for release/refund of excess royalty deducted from its bill in respect of Agreement No. ADB (PMGSY) 10/2005-06 (Annexure-1) along with accrued interest thereon within a stipulated period.

¶19

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the present writ petition is covered as per the decision of this Court passed in W.P.(C) No.11830 of 2013 on 18th March 2015 in the case of Akuli Charan Das v. State of Orissa and others and batch of cases , 2006 (Supp.-II) OLR 672 and as such, the present writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the said order.

¶20

Mr. T.K. Pattanayak, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties does not oppose to the same.

¶21

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 18th March 2015 passed in W.P.(C) No.11830 of 2013 and accordingly, we direct that in the event the

¶22

Page 1 of 2

¶23

Petitioner, with regard to the grievance made in this petition, files a comprehensive representation before appropriate authority attaching running account bills along with copy of this order annexing therewith the judgment of this Court dated 18^th March 2015 passed in W.P.(C) No.11830 of 2013 and batch of cases and the decision in the case Akuli Charan Das (supra) within four weeks hence, the same shall be considered and decided by the authority concerned by a reasoned and speaking order as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of filing of such representation.

¶24

It is further directed that in case the Petitioner is found to be entitled for refund of any amount, the same shall be refunded to the Petitioner within six weeks from the date of passing of the order or adjust the refundable amount against any ongoing/completed projects that they may be undertaking if the Petitioner may opt for.

¶25

Ashok

¶26

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
(DR. B.R. SARANGI)
JUDGE
(V. NARASINGH)
JUDGE

¶27

Page 2 of 2

M/S D.K.Engineering and Construction v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S D.K.Engineering and Construction 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

Mahesh Prasad Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Pruthwiraj Swain Vs State

M/S.Lal Trades Agenc Vs State

Durga Pr.Mishra Vs State

Sagar Construction Vs State and Ors.

Ranjit Ku.Swain Vs State