/ PETITIONER /’“‘ h RESPONDENTS 1. / @J Narendra Kumar Patel, aged about 37 years, S/o P.R. Patel, By Occupation Proprietor, Radiant Computer, R/o Raj apara, Kanker VERSUS The State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Ministry of Panchayat Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Distt. Raipur Chief Engineer, Pradhanmantri, Gram Sadak Yojna, Development Commissioner Office,‘ Raipur Executive Engineer, Pradhanmantri, Gram Sadak Yojna, Distt. Kanker Sub Divisional Officer, Rural Engineering Service, Sub Division, Kanker Chief Executive Officer, Chhattisgarh Gram Vikas Abhikaran civil Lines, Raipur WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No. WW /201 1 / HIGH COURT OF CHHATHSGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION 1C! NO‘1016 OF 2011 (Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of lndia) Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocates for the petitioner. Shri P.K. Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 6‘ day of July, 201 1) Heard learned counsel for the parties. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to ‘make payment of interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 02.09.2003 till 25.11.2010 on Rs.1,94,212/— and also seeks a direction to the respondents to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/— as ‘ damages. The facts, in nutshell, as projected by the petitioner, are that the petitioner was engaged by the respondent authorities to do the work of computer and photo-copy for the purpose of Pradhanmantri Gram Sadak Yojna. The petitioner was engaged in works like Core Network and Habitation DPR (Culvert + Bridge + Road Level + Drawing, complete preparing of map for the construction of road, G. Schedule, photo-copy, spiral binding etc. The petitioner submitted the bills for payment on 02.09.2003, 10.10.2003, 12.11.2003 and 07.04.2006. On account of non-payment, the petitioner tiled a writ petition, being W.P.(C) No. 521/2009, seeking direction, inter alia, to make payment of a sum of Rs. 1,94,212l— alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum, with damages to the tune of Rs. 1 lac. During pendency of the petition, it appears the amount was sanctioned but there was a dispute with regard to release of PETITIONER Narendra Kumar Patel Versus RESPONDENTS The State of Chhattisgarh & Others payment, thus the matter was disposed of with an observation that “it is expected that the respondent authorities No. 3 and 5 shall do the needful as expeditiously aspossible". The entire claim including the claim of the interest was settled by order dated 21 .10.2010 as it was stated that nothing remained for adjudication and thereafter, an amount of Rs. 1,94,212l- was paid to the petitioner. The petitioner has filed the instant petition claiming interest on the aforesaid amount at the rate of 12% per annum which was declined in the earlier petition as it was stated by the petitioner that nothing remained for adjudication and the earlier writ petition was disposed of. s In view of the foregoing, no direction to make payment of interest on the above stated amount can be passed in this petition. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to make a _ representation to the respondent authorities for grant of interest. ln the event. the representation is made, the same may be considered and decided by the respondent authorities in accordance with law, on its own merit, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. “My-M Sdl— a’Gowri Satish K. Agnihotri Judge