M/S Raja Sanitary Iron Stores Opp vs State Of M.P. on 27 November, 2019

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

M/S Raja Sanitary Iron Stores Opp vs State Of M.P. on 27 November, 2019

Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla

                                                           1                                   WP-19813-2019
                             The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                        WP-19813-2019
                                        (M/S RAJA SANITARY IRON STORES OPP Vs STATE OF M.P.)

                     3
                     Jabalpur, Dated : 27-11-2019
                            Shri Sanjay Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
                            Shri     Dilip   Pandey,     learned    Government        Advocate     for   the
                    respondents/State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards the order dated 25.06.2015 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No. 46/2014 (M/s Raja Sanitary Iron Store Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.), whereby the following order was passed by this Court:

"In view of the aforesaid submission and as agreed to by learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that to respondent no.3 to consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three months from the ate of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today. The petitioner would also be at liberty to file additional representation before the respondent no.3 within a period of two months from the ate of receipt of certified copy of this order. The respondent no.3 shall also afforded an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is made clear that, this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case."

Leaned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the said order he submitted a representation, but no action has been taken on the said representation by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Chhindwara (respondent No.3).

Learned Government Advocate for the State submits that the remedies lies for filing the contempt petition once the order was passed by this Court.

However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he will submit a fresh representation before the respondent no.3 and he may be directed to consider the said representation in accordance with law.

Digitally signed by AMITABH RANJAN Date: 28/11/2019 17:58:21

2 WP-19813-2019 For the said limited prayer, there is no objection by learned Government Advocate for the State.

In view of the aforesaid submissions and as agreed to by the parties, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent no.3 within a period of one months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this Order. If such a representation is submitted within the stipulated period, respondent no.3 shall consider and decide the said representation in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner by passing a speaking order within a period of two months thereafter.

It is made clear that, this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case.

With the aforesaid liberty and direction, the present petition is disposed of.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE Amitabh Digitally signed by AMITABH RANJAN Date: 28/11/2019 17:58:21

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court