c- P ^ tJ-S;8 ^•" BEFQRE^THEJION'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.t W.P(CtNo. '?^AT of 2010 PETITIONER / T.P.S. Infrastructure Limited, registered office at 84, M Block Cominercial Complex, Greater Kailash Part-II, New Delhi 48 RESPONDENTS .••^ s/ ^^ /f- .-• X1 * .-:? cf S'' -^^ VERSUS /: 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : its Secretary, Department of Urban Development & Administration, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) /2. The Commissioner, Department of Urban Development 85 Administration, R.D.A. Building, Bajrang Complex, Raipur (C.G.) ^3. Joint Director, Departrnent of Urban Development 8s Administration, R.D.A. Building, Bajrang Complex, Raipur (C.G.) ^4. Municipal Council, Janjgir-Naila, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), through its Chief Municipal Officer 5. Shri A.K. Haldhar, Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council, Janjgir, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTIONOF INDIA. HIftH COUKT WjWMVm66MtH A7 BILASnn^ MVISION BENCM: HON'BLE SHRI I.M.QU&6USI A^ HON'BLE SHftI H.K^ ^ftUtWAl.. JJ. WRIT PETITIQN fCI N0 322B/2010 PETITIONER R6SFON&ENTS Vs T.P.S. Infrastructwe Limited Stote of Chhiiriitisgarh 4i 5 ortiisr* Pr—nt: Mr. P.S. Koshy, Advocate wjth Mr, Vttibhay Shuklc!, Adyeeite for The petitioner Mr. C. Shrivastava. Panel Lawyer for the State. ORAL JU&6MENT (Passed on06th July. 2010) I.M. Ouddusi. J; 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length. < 2. By meons of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for the following substantjal relief;- "10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pl»as<t<l to direct the respondent authorities t®r«(c<ise the payments due against the supply of maehJnKS flind equipments tc.JIAutlicipol^Councjl^ Janjgir »fith 19% interest. 10.2. That.thjs Hon'ble Court may Undly bc pl<ya<»id to direct the appropriate authonty for ihjtigttng criminal proaitdcytion and discip{iniary.Si$^Sft^fflMiESt the respondent No.5 for nitsappi'ftpFWttffn of govemment funds. 10.3. Any other reljef^ie<ms fitAnJ"h<e.,jW^®B»tt.f<&cts and cjrcum$tances of this cuse. ,iBay alw be awarded to the petitioner." 3. It appears that themaJnj|rievimcftof4h<petittWWft;t«l(th|s writ petttipn is that the ftmount sanctjwied f»rthes ini^epjng machine was used by the Chkif Municipal pfficer, ilBuntcJpfll Councit, Janjgir in some other connection and wrhe-rtier the ^i ^%%s "^ "i!: 5. 6, same was permissible or not, this Court js not gomg t^ ie(iiiiujre inte. Though this is a^sericfflS Matter but we^l+ijnkj^^ in case the petitioner jm^vcs a pBprejwntattftn to the respondent Ma.Z h^pein, ,thl? nspondwf No.i? ^jshfltl^gie'f' an enquiry done into 1iie niatter and tal<e^appropr»a'pe,riecis»on<Ji action and if the amountis found due thtn tnitn^^tfli mff payment of cost of mafihines and eiijuipments tUpplfBd fey tb< petitioner expeditjausly, preferably «i'ithin,a ,perii»d pf three months from the ^dite of prodyction ;of copy. of tbis order along with the representation. The writ petition is djsposed of accorclingly. Certifjed copy as per rules, Sd;- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge