;''/^ •^.'-^' A S9 HK3H COURT OF CHHATTISOARH AT BIU^PUR Writ Petition (C) No.S507 of 2010 PETITtONER: Harvlnder Singh Bhatta, S/o Late Shri Baiwant Singh Bhatia, aged about 48 years, occupation business, R/o Bazaipara, Pathatgaon, District Jashpur Nagar (CG) ' Versus RESPONDENTS: 1. 2. 3. 4, The State of Chhatti^arti, through the Secretary, Department of Food and Civil Suppties, Mantralay at DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG) The General Manager, Fo@d Corporation of India, Regional OfRce, Kapa, Raipur (CG) The Assistant General Manager (Contfact), Food Corporation of India, Regional OfRcer, Kapa, Raipur (CG) The District Manager (Contract), Food Corporation of India, District Office, Bilaspur (CG) Shri SanjeevBanjare, counsel for the pefitsoner. Shri U.N.S. Deo, Govt. Adweate for the State. DjvisionBench: Hon'bte Shrt Dhirendra Mishra & Hon'bSe Shri R.N. Chamlrakar. .IJ. ORDER (24-9-2010) The following order of the Court was ?»ssedby ©hirendraMishra, J. Grievance of the petitioner is that he was awarded Rail Head Handling and Transportation Contract, Raigarh by respondent No.2 for the year 2003 to 2005 and he satisteotorily completed the contract as per the agreement. However, his security deposit to thetune of Rs.2, 04,180/- has been widheld a sum of Rs.10,613/- has been refunded thrwgh demand draft alcmg wth memo dated 71h Augu^, 2£X)8by theArea ManagCTof respondent No.2 .in vtew of the cireular dated 9-1-2006 (Annexure-P/2) issued by the GeR®al Manager,though the circular did not have any retrospect'ive effect and by the time the petitiQner had already compfeted the work under the agreeinent. 2 Leamed counset forthe prfitfoner submftted thatthe petttioner has been representing against the above illegal acts of the r^ptwidents vfde applications of Annexures-P/4, P/5, P/6 and P/7. The Area Manager, Bilaspur has neeommended to exempt te petitioner vide memo ®f Annexures-P/8. P/9 and P/10 addressed to the General Manager (Area), Regional Office, Raipur, however, representations of the petittoner have not been considered and decided till date. He further submitted that he is not presstng this petition on merits, however, he prays for directton to the respondents to decide his representations. •i. Heard. 4 The instant petition is d!sp(%ed of as not pressed with llberty to fhe petitioner to frte fresh representation before respondent No.2 raisir^ hls grievanoes raised in this petition along with copy of this order wlthfn a period of 10 days frorn today. On such represerrtatfon being made, respondent No.2 shall consider and decide the same on its own merfts in acconJance w'th law within a period of 4 weete from the date of receipt of representatton. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge ''';;'^-£:s^'.>;-^'^ ^'•" ^''•'