Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 184434 (ALL)

M/S GORAKHPUR RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED THRU. DIRECTOR MR. NEERAJ MATANHELIA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS SECY. COOPERATIVE LKO. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIC/10335/2025 · 2025-11-06

Alok Mathur, Prashant Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 10335 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J. Heard Sri Jay Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondents/State and Sri Ankit Singh, Advocate has appeared on behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3 and filed Vakalatnama, the same is taken on record. By means of the present writ petition, the following prayer has been made by the petitioner: "A. A writ, an order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 3 to pay the admitted amount due i.e. Rs.1,17,16,092.34 (One Crore Seventeen Lakhs Sixteen Thousand Ninety Two Rupees and Thirty Four Paise) with interest within a fix period. B. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.03 to pass an appropriate order on the representation dated 18.02.2025 and 06.03.2025 made by the petitioner about the due admitted amount with interest." It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that under an agreement for supply of the De-oiled Rice Bran to respondent no.3 as per the purchase order no.741, the petitioner had supplied 988.025 Mt.of De- Oiled Rice Bran upto 13.03.2024. The petitioner has raised the bill and Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Jay Prakash Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sandeep Sharma M/S Gorakhpur Resources Private Limited Thru. Director Mr. Neeraj Matanhelia .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Cooperative Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) though certain amount was paid as on date, however an amount of Rs.1,17,16,092.34 is still outstanding despite the fact that as per the agreement it was required to be paid within thirty days and the maximum 45 days under the terms of the agreement. Upon perusal of the writ petition, it is patently clear that the supply was completed by March, 2024 and once the supply was made, the payment was to be made within a period of thirty days and any retention of money by the respondents beyond the terms of the contract is arbitrary. Learned counsel for the respondents appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3, has not been able to give any plausible explanation for the delay of more than six months in making the payment and the only reason appears to be is the paucity of funds with the State Government and the respondent nos. 2 & 3. In view of the aforesaid submissions, it appears that the respondents are unable to make payment to the petitioner as they do not have the money and they require further time to make the payment which cannot be countenanced. The excuse for non-payment is absurd and without any basis of law and the facts whatsoever. In the light of the above, the respondent no.2, is directed to pay the outstanding amount along penal interest at the rate 9% p.a. from the date of expiry of thirty days' period after submission of the bill and the said payment shall be made within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the respondents. In the event, the money is not paid to the petitioner within the time prescribed hereinabove, further penal interest at the rate of 6% p.a. shall be payable to the petitioner along with the interest. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. November 6, 2025 Arjun/- WRIC No. 10335 of 2025 2 (Prashant Kumar,J.) (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARJUN PRASAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench