Kedar Nath Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh 24 Mcc/470/2018 ... on 27 June, 2018

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Chattisgarh High Court

Kedar Nath Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh 24 Mcc/470/2018 ... on 27 June, 2018

Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal

                                                                       NAFR

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                               WPC No. 1711 of 2018

        Kedar Nath Sahu S/o Shri Firtu Ram Sahu, aged about 48 years, R/o
        Village Pawni, Police Station, Bilaigarh, Tahsil Bilaigarh, District
        Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara (C.G.)                      ---- Petitioner

                                      Versus

     1. State Of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Khadya Nagri9k Aapurti
        Nigam, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur
        (C.G.)

     2. The Collector, Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazar,
        Bhatapara (C.G.)

     3. The District Distribution Officer, Chhattisgarh Rajya Vipnan Maryadit
        Sangh, Near Ganga Maiya Temple, Jhalmala, Tahsil Bilaigarh, District
        Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara (C.G.)                      ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate. For Respondents / State : Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 27/06/18

1. The petitioner's appeal / representation has been decided by impugned order dated 04.05.2018 by respondent No. 2 which has been questioned in this writ petition holding that the amount due to the petitioner has already been paid to the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order is unsustainable and bad in law and is liable to be set aside.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the order impugned with utmost circumspection.

4. Considering the facts, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order as the remedy of the petitioner is to approach the jurisdictional Civil Court for redressal of his grievance since the disputed question of fact is involved in this instant case and the dispute between the parties is a contractual dispute.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty reserved in favour of the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Civil Court or any other authority in accordance with law for redressal of his grievance. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Chattisgarh High Court