In a writ petition concerning the SWA Shakti Project, the High Court held that the petitioner's claims involved disputed questions of fact and directed the petitioner to seek remedies before a Civil Court.
Direction to the petitioner to seek remedies before the Civil Court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP NO.15955 of 2006
DATE OF DECISION: October 9, 2006
Social Association for Welfare Education & Rural Awareness
VERSUS
Union of India and others
…..Respondents
CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.BHALLA
PRESENT: Shri B.B.Bagga, Advocate for the petitioner.
Viney Mittal,J.(Oral).
The petitioner has approached this Court for issuance of directions to the respondents to act as per law and public policy in the context of implementation of the social welfare scheme described as SWA Shakti Project. A further claim has been made to settle the claims of the petitioner in accordance with the policy and contract, without any discrimination and to make the requisite payments.
After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into consideration the averments made in the present petition, we find that the petitioner had served a legal notice dated September 12, 2005 (Annexure P.5) claiming the reliefs which the petitioner has claimed before this Court. The aforesaid legal notice was replied by the Managing Director of Haryana Women Development
Corporation, respondent No.3. The claim of the petitioner was contested. In the
aforesaid reply to the legal notice, the respondent No.3 maintained that all the outstanding payments due to the petitioner had already been made and no further amount was due. The respondent No.3 has also maintained that the work of the petitioner was not satisfactory at all.
The aforesaid stand of the respondent No.3 has in fact been denied by the petitioner in the present petition.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that the petitioner has raised disputed questions of fact which can only be determined on production of evidence.
Consequently, we dispose of the present petition and relegate the petitioner to seek its remedies before the Civil Court, if so advised.
(Viney Mittal) Judge
October 9, 2006 (H.S. Bhalla) KD Judge
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's claims regarding the SWA Shakti Project involve disputed questions of fact requiring evidence before a Civil Court.
Whether the writ petition can be decided summarily or if it requires a triable record.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to reliefs from this court or must approach the Civil Court.
Social Association for Welfare Education & Rural Awareness
Union of India
Haryana Women Development Corporation
Viney Mittal
H.S. Bhalla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
