1 / 3 2025:CGHC:6848 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 68 of 2025 1 - M/s Vinod Kumar Jain Having Office At A-3, Jeevan Vihar, Telibandha, Raipur, C.G. Through Its Authorized Representative Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, S/o Hanuman Prasad Jain Aged About 59 Years, R/o College Road, Jashpur Nagar Ram Kumar Aged About 30 Years R/o Ghatampur, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Chief Secretary, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 – Secretary, Public Works Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 – Engineer-In-Chief, Public Works Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Nirman Bhavan, Sector-19, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Executive Engineer, Division No. 1, Raipur, Public Works Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) 2 / 3 For Petitioner : Mr. Ayush Singh Solanki, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Abhinav Kardekar, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Ritesh Giri, Panel Lawyer (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 06/02/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction towards the respondent authorities/Public Works Department for reimbursement of GST amount of Rs.18,60,323/- alongwith applicable interest. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 28/08/2024 (Annexure P/13) to the respondent No.4/Executive Engineer, PWD, Division No.1, Raipur alongwith the requisite documents which have been endorsed by the Office of Executive Engineer however, the document dated 23/01/2025 (Annexure R/2) referred by the State in its reply states that the petitioner has approached the authority without disclosing the requisite information and documents and for which, decision is not being taken in the representation submitted by the petitioner till date. He would further submit that, as the representation and claim of the petitioner is not being decided due to lack of requisite information, the petitioner be permitted to submit a fresh representation alongwith all the information and requisite documents. Further he seeks direction towards the Executive Engineer to pass necessary order and consider the representation submitted by the petitioner within the stipulated time. 3 / 3 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has not opposed the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that if the petitioner will file a fresh representation alongwith all the requisite information and documents, the same shall be decided within a period of 60 days from the date of filing of such representation. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents as well as the communication dated 23/01/2025 (Annexure R/2). 5. Looking to the reply submitted by the respondent/State, that the representation is not being decided due to lack of requisite information, the petitioner is directed to submit a fresh representation alongwith all the requisite documents and information before the respondent No.4/Executive Engineer, PWD, Division No.1, Raipur within a period of two weeks. In the event of filing of such representation, the Executive Engineer is directed to decide the same within a further period of 60 days from the date of filing of such representation, in accordance with law. 6. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE $. Bhilwar