Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 10]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

M/S Raja Sanitary Iron Stores Opp. ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 June, 2015

                               WP-46-2014
( M/S RAJA SANITARY IRON STORES OPP. RAILWAY STATION, BETUL GANJ, BETUL, M.P. Vs
                        THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


25-06-2015
       Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
       Mr. Girish Kekre, learned Government Advocate
for the respondents.

Heard on I.A. No.6159/15 Taking into account the nature of proposed amendment and for the reasons stated therein, same is allowed. Let necessary amendment be incorporated during the course of the day.

With consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

In this writ petition, the petitioner inter- alia seeks a direction to the respondents to make payment to the petitioner for the supplies made by it.

When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that with regard to its grievance the petitioner has submitted representations contained in Annexures P/21 to P/23 to respondent No.3 namely the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Chhindwara, and the writ petition be disposed of with a direction to the aforesaid authority to consider and decide the said representations expeditiously.

On the other hand, learned Government Advocate submits the representations submitted by the petitioner shall be dealt with in accordance with law.

In view of 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 date 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 date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The respondent No.3 shall also afford 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.

C.C. as per rules.

(ALOK ARADHE) JUDGE