Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ANKUR YADAV versus JAGAN SINGH & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ankur Yadav v. Jagan Singh & Others - WRIT - C No. 26454 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 10400 (5 June 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

HON.SHISHIR KUMAR, J.

By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has approached this Court for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to make the payment of the outstanding bills duly verified and further a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No.2 to extend the period of supply for the current financial year.

The petitioner was given a contract for supply of certain goods to the Mental Hospital, Varanasi which is effective from 1.4.2006 to 31.3.2007 or till fresh tender is finalized.  The petitioner submits that in spite of the time mentioned in the agreement, has come to an end but  fresh tender has not been invited, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to supply goods to the Mental Hospital.  But due to change of the officer the respondent No.2 has started taking supply from one RR Enterprises.  Petitioner submits that according to the agreement the petitioner is entitled to supply the goods. Further submission has been made by the petitioner that bills for payment of the goods which has already been supplied, have been submitted and same has been approved, has not been paid to the petitioner.

To this effect, the petitioner has already submitted a representation dated 30.4.2007 (Annexure 6 to the writ petition) to the respondent No.2 which is still pending and the same has not been decided.

Taking into facts and circumstances of the present case, the present writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction to the respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner and pass a detailed and reasoned order according to law preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of the order.

With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.

No order as to costs.

5.6.2007

SKD

W.P.No.26454 of 2007


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.