Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11669 (CHH)

SINGHANIA GROUP AND INDUSTRIES v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/1207/2025 · 2025-03-05

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:10677 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1207 of 2025 1 - Singhania Group And Industries Through Its Partner, Pramod Singhania, S/o Late Puran Lal Singhania, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Sharda Chowk, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh. 3 - District Education OfÏcer Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Shri C.Jayant K. Rao, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Shri Praveen Das, Dy. Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2025.03.06 16:09:26 +0530 2 05.03.2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction towards the respondent to release the undisputed amount of Rs. 2,57,55,871/- towards the supply of computer furniture, student furniture, conference table, basis level LED Interactive touch panel, Mobile Unit Compactor to various schools of the State under the rate contract with Chhattisgarh State Industrial Development Corporation Limited. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that pursuance to the supply order dated 06.10.2023, the petitioner supplied the requisite articles to various schools under the rate contract. The schools have issued the work completion certificate and he annexed the same in the writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the receiving made by the school towards the article has been annexed in the writ petition. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has submitted a representation to the Collector Korba on 24.02.2025, but till date the amount which is undisputed has not been released to the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the State would submit that the mere submission of receiving certificate of articles is not sufÏcient to release the amount which is claimed by the petitioner, however as the representation has been filed by the petitioner to the Collector for release of the amount which is alleged to be outstanding towards the said supply made by the petitioner. The Collector shall verify the claim lodged by the petitioner by affording opportunity of hearing to 3 the petitioner and if the amount claimed by the petitioner is found to be undisputed, the same shall be released in accordance with law. 4. I have heard learned counsels for the parties and in view of the submission made by the State counsel and the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 24.02.2025 to the Collector Korba, The Collector Korba is directed to decide the representation within a period of 30 days in accordance with law by verifying the claim lodged by the petitioner and if the amount claimed by the petitioner is not in dispute the same be released in accordance with law. 5. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Shoaib