Dismissed

Shankar Kishor Chaudhary v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC24 Aug 2021L.P.A/120/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court bench allowed a delay condonation application and then dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal. The court held that the underlying dispute involved disputed facts regarding a commercial transaction and monetary claims, warranting adjudication in a civil recovery suit rather than writ jurisdiction, finding no infirmity in the lower court's order.

What did the court decide?

Disposal of the appeal and related interlocutory application.

Shankar Kishor Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.120 of 2019 In

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12853 of 2016

¶3

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

¶4

Shankar Kishor Chaudhary Shri Inderdeo Chaudhary Resident of VillageJadhua, Barai Tola, Ward No-38, Post Office- Railway Station Hajipur, Police Station- Industrial Area Hajipur, District- Vaishali, State- Bihar.

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Principal Secretary, Agriculture Department, State of Bihar, Patna Patna.

¶9

The Agriculture, Production Commissioner, State of Bihar, Patna. Patna.

¶10

The Director, Horticulture-Cum- Mission Director, Bihar, Patna. Patna

¶11

The Nodal Officer, Horticulture, Mission, Bihar, Patna Patna

¶12

The Assistant Director, Horticulture, Sheikhpura, Bihar. Bihar

¶13

The District Horticulture Officer, Sheikhpura, Bihar. Bihar

¶14

... ... Respondent/s

¶15

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

¶16

Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Chandra Shekher Prasad, Advocate Mr. Pancham Lal Jaiswal, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Awanish Nandan Sinha, GP 21 Mr. Jai Prakash Sharma, AC to GP 21 ======================================================

¶17

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶18

(The proceedings of the Court are being conducted by Hon’ble the Chief Justice/Hon’ble Judges through Video Conferencing from their residential offices/residences. Also the Advocates and the Staffs joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residences/offices.)

¶19

Date : 24-08-2021

¶20

I.A. No.1 of 2019

¶21

This interlocutory application has been filed for

¶22

condonation of delay of 14 days in filing the present appeal.

¶23

Patna High Court L.P.A No.120 of 2019 dt.24-08-2021 2/3

¶24

Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the delay has been sufficiently explained. The delay condonation application is allowed. The appeal shall be treated to be within time.

¶25

L.P.A. No.120 of 2019

¶26

This appeal is directed against the order dated 03.12.2018, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 12853 of 2016, titled as Shankar Kishor Chaudhary Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. by a learned Single Bench of this Court whereby the writ petition has been disposed of with liberty.

¶27

Impugned order, in toto, is reproduced as under:

¶28

“In view of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, a disputed question of fact has arisen as to whether the petitioner had supplied two metric tons of seeds or 30 metric tons of seeds, resultantly a dispute regarding payment to be made to the petitioner has also arisen.

¶29

The respondents have filed a counter affidavit denying the claim of the petitioner and the claim of the petitioner has also been rejected by the Deputy Director (Horticulture), Nawada by an order dated 04.01.2016.

¶30

Having considered the rival contentions, this Court is of the opinion that since disputed question of facts are involved in the present case, the petitioner would be well advised to file a recovery suit before the appropriate court of competent civil jurisdiction.

¶31

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.”

¶32

Having perused the same, we do not find any

¶33

Patna High Court L.P.A No.120 of 2019 dt.24-08-2021 3/3

¶34

infirmity/illegality warranting interfere with the same. The dispute inter se the parties arises out of a commercial transaction. Claims, which are monetary in nature and disputed, are sought to be adjudicated in a petition filed under Article 226/227 of the constitution of India.

¶35

Learned Single Judge rightly disposed of the petition leaving it open to the writ petitioner to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

¶36

As such, finding no merit, the appeal stands disposed of.

¶37

Interlocutory application, if any, shall also stand

¶38

disposed of.

¶39

(Sanjay Karol, CJ)

¶40

( S. Kumar, J)

¶41

K.C.Jha/DKS/-

¶42

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date	01.09.2021
Transmission Date

Shankar Kishor Chaudhary v. The State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shankar Kishor Chaudhary 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

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalicharan Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Arun Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjeev Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Gaurav Kumar Singh Vs The Patna High Court

Mohd. Nurul Hoda Vs The State Election Commission

Sanjeet Kumar Jha, Vs The State of Bihar