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 2]

Patna High Court - Orders

Suresh Narayan Sinha vs The Chief Gemeral Manager,Bsnl on 30 August, 2011

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                         CWJC No.13003 of 2005
                   Suresh Narayan Sinha, S/o Late Awadh Bihari Prasad, resident of
                   Jhikahia Maisthan, M.I.T., Muzaffarpur- 842003.
                                                                        ...... Petitioner.
                                                   Versus
                   1. The Chief General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited,
                       Meghdoot Building, GPO Campus, Patna.
                   2. The General Manager, BSNL, Telecom District, Darbhanga.
                   3. The Account-officer, GMTD, BSNL, Darbhanga.
                   4. The Divisional Engineer, Planning BSNL, Telecom District,
                       Darbhanga.
                   5. The Divisional Engineer, Administration, BSNL, Telecom District,
                       Darbhanga.
                                                                      ......Respondents.
                                               -----------
                   For the petitioner       : Mr. Tuhin Shankar, Advocate.

                   For the respondents       : Mr. J. P. Karn, Advocate.
                                                   ----------

03/   30.08.2011

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:-

(i) For payment of 10% security deposit of Rs.37,449/-

deposited/retained by the respondents for the contract work of O.F.C.Route pipe laying and cable pulling Ladari-Bela More vide Agreement No. GMTD/PLG/Tender/OFC/IInd Phase dated 17.10.2000 under an original agreement amount of Rs.2,30,963/- and the enhanced contract amount of Rs.3,74,491/-.

(ii) For payment of 10% security deposit of Rs.23,377/-

deposited/retained by the respondent for the contract work of O.F.C. Route pipe laying & cable pulling Tarsarai Bhal Patti Route no.12 vide Agreement No. GMTD/Tender/OFC Route no.12 dated March, 2000 under an original agreement amount of Rs.2,15,623/- and the enhanced contract amount of Rs.2,33,766/-.

(iii) For payment of 10% security deposit of Rs.21475/-

deposited/retained by the respondent for the contract work of O.F.C. Route pipe laying & cable pulling, Gandhare, Pandaul, Madhubani Route no.8 dated March, 2000 under an original agreement amount of Rs.2,14,761/- and the enhanced contract amount of Rs.1,89,145/-.

(iv) For payment of 10% security deposit of Rs.6,200/-

-2-

deposited/retained by the respondents for the contract work of O.F.C. route pipe laying and cable pulling of Simari Kansi Route vide Agreement no. GMTD/ PLG / Tender /OFC / Vth Phase /DBN/ dated May, 2002 under an original agreement amount of Rs.46,000/- and the enhanced contract amount of Rs.48,449/-.

(v) For payment of 10% security deposit of Rs.19,225/-

deposited/retained by the respondents for the contract work of O.F.C. Route pipe laying and cable pulling of Sonki to Benipur vide Agreement no.

GMTD/AG/Tender/OFC/Vth Phase dated 30.4.2002 under an original agreement amount of Rs.90,500/- and the paid amount of Rs.85,484/-.

3. After considering the averments made by learned counsel for the parties and the materials on record, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file an application before the General Manager, BSNL, Telecom District, Darbhanga (respondent no.2) giving details of his aforesaid claim of contractual dues. If such an application is filed by the petitioner along with a copy of this order within fifteen days from today, the said authority shall consider the same in accordance with law and shall decide by a speaking order within three months thereafter and if any amount is found to be admitted and payable it should be immediately paid to the petitioner. However, if any amount is not found to be admitted and payable in the said order, the petitioner will be at liberty to challenge the same before an appropriate forum.

(S. N. Hussain, J.) Sunil