Allowed

Purnendu Chandra Sinha v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC14 Nov 2013CWJC/3503/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil writ jurisdiction case, the Hon'ble High Court of Patna directed the respondent Chief Engineer to pay the petitioner a due work compensation amount within two months, with an additional interest penalty for delay.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent Chief Engineer to pay the petitioner the due work amount within 2 months; 12% compoundable interest from own pocket if not paid by deadline.

Purnendu Chandra Sinha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Money Laundering | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

Patna High Court CWJC No.3503 of 2013 (2) dt.14-11-2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶3

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3503 of 2013

¶4

======================================================

¶5

Purnendu Chandra Sinha S/O Late Surendra Pd. Sinha R/O Village - Muhalla - Motijhil, P.S. - Nagar, Distt. Muzaffarpur.

¶6

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary R.C.D., Bihar (Patna)-Cum-NH Bihar (Patna), Vishwashariya Bhawan, Patna. 2. Engineer-In-Chief-Cum-Additional Commissioner-Cum-Special Secretary, NH Bihar (Patna), Vishwashariya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 3. Executive Engineer, NH 77 Division No. 2 Combaindra Building, Muzaffarpur.

¶7

Chief Engineer, RCD, NH Sub-Division, Patna.

¶8

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Archana Palkar Khopde For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.K. Verma

¶9

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 14-11-2013 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to add the Chief Engineer as party respondent in this writ application in course of the day.

¶11

As per the case of petitioner, under valid work orders, he executed the work and completed the same to the satisfaction of the respondents. Thereafter, he submitted his bills. Submission is that the bills were processed and the amount was ascertained which was found due to the petitioner. Thereafter request was also

¶12

made by the Engineer-in-Chief to the Chief Engineer, vide his letter dated 16.6.2010, annexed as Annexure-2, for payment from certain allotment. However, grievance is that the amount has not

¶13

Patna High Court CWJC No.3503 of 2013 (2) dt.14-11-2013

¶14

yet been paid to the petitioner.

¶15

If the petitioner had completed the work to the satisfaction of the respondents and his bills were processed and due amount of the petitioner was ascertained, the respondents were under legal obligation to pay the same to the petitioner at the earliest.

¶16

This writ application is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondent Chief Engineer to see to it that the due amount of the petitioner, as mentioned in the said letter dated 16.6.2010 of the Engineer-in-Chief, is paid to the petitioner positively within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, failing which he shall be liable to pay interest at the rate of 12% compoundable yearly on the said due amount from his own pocket.

¶17

(Jayanandan Singh, J)

¶18

Arvind/-

Purnendu Chandra Sinha v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Purnendu Chandra Sinha v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sadhu Yadav and Ors. Vs Shibjee Yadav and Ors.

Ram Kumari Devi Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Banshidhar Mishra Vs Dr. Umesh SHARMAand Ors.

M/s Sawan Raj Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mosafir Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Parbati Kumari @ Parwati Devi Vs Chairman National Insurance Com.ltd and Ors.