Mamlesh Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1051139
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnDec-03-2012
AppellantMamlesh Sharma
RespondentThe State of Madhya Pradesh
Excerpt:
w.p.no.20034 / 2012 (mamlesh sharma ..vs.state of mp & others.03-12-2012 shri parag s. chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner. shri s.m.lal, govt. advocate for the state/respondents. the petitioner has filed this petition praying for refund of the security amount and the f.d.r.which he had deposited for grant of quarry lease, the period of which is already over. it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in spite of approaching the concerned respondent/authorities repeatedly, the said amount has not been released to the petitioner till date. from a perusal of the petition, it is apparent that the petitioner has already approached the respondent/authorities by filing a representation for release of the aforesaid amount which is pending before the collector, seoni. the learned govt. advocate, appearing for the state/respondents submits that in case the petitioner files a fresh representation before the respondent/authorities, the same shall be considered and decided by the concerned authority expeditiously in accordance with law. in the circumstances, without entering into the merits of the case and subject to pendency of any further outstanding dues against the petitioner, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner files a fresh representation before the concerned authority alongwith a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition within 15 days of obtaining the same, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same expeditiously preferably within a period of two months thereafter, after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner and by passing a reasoned order thereon in accordance with law . it is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner and, therefore, the concerned authority, while deciding the representation of the petitioner, would be at liberty to take into consideration all facts and facets of the case and thereafter take a decision thereon by either accepting or rejecting the same. with the aforesaid directions the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of. c.c.as per rules. (r.s.jha) judge mct
Judgment:

W.P.No.20034 / 2012 (Mamlesh Sharma ..Vs.State of MP & otheRs.03-12-2012 Shri Parag S.

Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Shri S.M.Lal, Govt.

Advocate for the State/respondents.

The petitioner has filed this petition praying for refund of the security amount and the F.D.R.which he had deposited for grant of quarry lease, the period of which is already over.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in spite of approaching the concerned respondent/authorities repeatedly, the said amount has not been released to the petitioner till date.

From a perusal of the petition, it is apparent that the petitioner has already approached the respondent/authorities by filing a representation for release of the aforesaid amount which is pending before the Collector, Seoni.

The learned Govt.

Advocate, appearing for the State/respondents submits that in case the petitioner files a fresh representation before the respondent/authorities, the same shall be considered and decided by the concerned authority expeditiously in accordance with law.

In the circumstances, without entering into the merits of the case and subject to pendency of any further outstanding dues against the petitioner, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner files a fresh representation before the concerned authority alongwith a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition within 15 days of obtaining the same, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same expeditiously preferably within a period of two months thereafter, after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner and by passing a reasoned order thereon in accordance with law .

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner and, therefore, the concerned authority, while deciding the representation of the petitioner, would be at liberty to take into consideration all facts and facets of the case and thereafter take a decision thereon by either accepting or rejecting the same.

With the aforesaid directions the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.

C.C.as per rules.

(R.S.Jha) Judge mct