Disposed

Kailash Coop. Labour & Const. Ltd. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Jan 2009CWP/1143/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition directed the respondent engineer to consider a representation regarding unpaid work execution and release payments if the petitioner was found entitled.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Chief Engineer, Drainage, Govt. of Punjab to consider the representation dated 07.11.2008 and release payments within two months if entitled.

Kailash Coop. Labour & Const. Ltd. Vs State of Punjab & Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2009) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

C.W.P NO. 1143 OF 2009 DECIDED ON : 23.01.2009

¶3

The Kailash Co-op. Labour & Cons. Society

¶4

...Petitioner

¶5

versus

¶6

State of Punjab and others

¶7

...Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT

¶9

Present : Mr. Hemant Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶10

SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)

¶11

The prayer in this writ petition is to direct the respondents to make payment to the petitioner of Rs.67,485/along with interest.

¶12

As per the petitioner's case, respondent No.4, namely, The Superintending Engineer, Amritsar Drainage Circle, Amritsar allotted the work, namely, remodelling of Rotoke Minor and Jodh Singh Wala Feeder to increase the discharge (including brick lining) from RD 9015 to 20460 (Slice RD 12000 to 15637) Sub reach 12000 to 13600, vide Form No. 60/3 dated 10.02.2006 to the petitioner which has already been satisfactorily executed. It is further averred that a bill of Rs. 67,485/- (balance payment of Rs.32,485/- plus security amount of Rs.35,000/-) has also been prepared for payment to the petitioner. The payment, however, is stated to have been with held for no valid reason.

¶13

-2-

¶14

C.W.P NO. 1143 OF 2009

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that representation dated 07.11.2008 (Annexure P-2) was moved, however, no action has been taken on the same.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and without going into the merits of the claim contained in this writ petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition with a direction to the Chief Engineer, Drainage, Government of Punjab, to consider the claim raised by the petitioner in the representation dated 07.11.2008 (Annexure P-2) and if the petitioner is found entitled to certain payments on account of the work executed by it, to release the said payments within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶17

JANUARY 23, 2009 shalini

¶18

(SURYA KANT) JUDGE

Kailash Coop. Labour & Const. Ltd. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kailash Coop. Labour & Const. Ltd. v. State of Punjab & 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

Sant Lal Vs Gopi Ram and Ors.

Sukhwinder Kaur, Lecturer Vs Thapar Polytechnic College, Patiala & Ors.

Ramesh Gupta Vs State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur

Jaswinder Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jagmohan Lal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Kandowali Coop. Labour & Const. Society Ltd. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.