Allowed

Jai Bhushan Malik v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Aug 2009CWP/12725/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner sought release of admitted payment for work executed. The Court directed the authorities to decide a pending representation and release the amount within three months with 8% annual interest on delay.

What did the court decide?

Directions to decide pending representation and release admitted payment within three months with 8% annual interest on delay, or pass a speaking order rejecting the claim.

Jai Bhushan Malik Vs State of… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

¶2

CHANDIGARH

¶3

Civil Writ Petition No.12725 of 2009 Date of Decision: 21.08.2009

¶4

Jai Bhushan Malik

¶5

Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Punjab and others

¶8

Respondents

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH

¶10

Present: Mr.Rajesh Kumar Girdhar, Advocate for the petitioner

¶11

Jasbir Singh, J.(Oral)

¶12

Notice of motion.

¶13

On asking of the Court, Mr.Jaswinder Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice.

¶14

Heard.

¶15

By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed that directions be issued to the respondents, to release admitted payment, due to him towards execution of work, detail of which has been mentioned in para No.2 of the writ petition.

¶16

It is case of the petitioner that he has successfully executed the work, as mentioned above. Entries were made in the measurement book and amount due to him towards final bill was approved by the authorities, however, the payment has not been released. Thereafter he sent a representation dated 9.6.2009 (P7), which is pending undecided.

¶17

¶18

Civil Writ Petition No.12725 of 2009

¶19

This Court feels that if there is no defect in the work executed by the petitioner, the authorities are not justified to detain amount due to him.

¶20

In view of facts mentioned above, this writ petition is disposed of by issuing directions to respondent No.4 to decide representation dated 9.6.2009 (P7) semt by the petitioner and if there is no legal hitch, release admitted payment to the petitioner, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, the petitioner shall be entitled to get interest @ 8% per annum from the date the amount had become due to it till its realisation. To the contrary, if the officer concerned wishes to reject claim of the petitioner, on valid grounds, a speaking order be passed and a copy thereof be supplied to him.

¶21

Copy of the order be supplied to the State counsel under signatures of the Court Reader for compliance.

¶22

21.08.2009 (Jasbir Singh) gk Judge

Jai Bhushan Malik v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Bhushan Malik v. State of Punjab 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

M/S Deep Medicos Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Senior Citizen Welfare Society Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Jagjit Singh Vs State Transport Commissioner, Pb. & Anr.

Hardip Singh Vs Director of Industries St. of Hry. and Anr.

Gurinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

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