Allowed

Ajay Kumar v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Jul 2016CWP/14138/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order in a writ petition under Articles 226/227 directed the Executive Engineer to consider a pending representation from the petitioner regarding a grievance and to decide it within one month, if eligible to release the sought amount.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.4 to decide the pending representation within one month and release the amount if the petitioner is entitled.

Ajay Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No. 14138 of 2016 Date of Decision: 20.7.2016

Ajay Kumar

.....Petitioner

Vs.

State of Punjab and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK

¶9

Present : None for the petitioner.

¶10

¶11

RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J. (ORAL)

¶12

Feeling aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of respondent authorities, petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus.

¶13

A bare perusal of the file would reveal that when the genuine grievance of the petitioner was not being redressed, he finally approached the respondent authorities by way of a representation dated 1.6.2016 (Annexure P-2), but the same is also pending decision. Thus, it would be in the interest of justice, if respondent No.4 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner within a reasonable time.

¶14

AMIT KUMAR 2016.07.21 18:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶15

Civil Writ Petition No. 14138 of 2016 2

¶16

After going through the record of the case file and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, lest it should prejudice the rights of either of the parties, present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Executive Engineer, Water Supply & Sanitation Division Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib-respondent No.4 to look into the matter, consider the grievance of the petitioner raised vide his representation dated 1.6.2016 (Annexure P-2) and decide the same at an early date, by passing an appropriate order thereon, strictly in accordance with law, but in any case within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶17

It is further directed that if, after due consideration of the matter, respondent No. 4 comes to the conclusion that the petitioner is entitled for the amount being sought to be released, the same shall be released in favour of the petitioner, without any further loss of time.

¶18

With the abovesaid observations made and directions issued, present writ petition stands disposed of.

¶19

(RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) JUDGE

¶20

20.7.2016 Ak Sharma

¶21

AMIT KUMAR 2016.07.21 18:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶22

AMIT KUMAR 2016.07.21 18:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Ajay Kumar v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Jay Pee and Sons Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Brij Lal Contractor Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Karam Chand and Anr. Vs Superintending Canal Officer and Ors.

Ajit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Rajbala Vs Union of India and Ors.

Dharminder Singh Vs Financial Commissioner (Appeals) Punjab and Ors.