IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
---
L.P.A. No. 63 of 2009
---
Raghubansh Kumar ..... ....... ..... ..... Appellant
--Versus--
State of Jharkhand & Ors. ...... ....... ...... Respondents
---
CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD
---
For the Appellant : Mr. B.P. Tetarbe
For the Respondents : Mr. P.A.S.Pati, J.C. to A.G.
10/ 23.04.2010
This appeal has been preferred against the order
dated 8.1.2009, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)
No. 29 of 2008 by which the writ petition was dismissed holding
therein that the claim of the petitioner for payment of a sum of
Rs.2,32,636/- on account of bills which he has raised for
execution of the contract, which he claims, was executed in his
favour as also the payment of adequate compensation for the
alleged harassment caused to the petitioner, was rejected. The
learned Single Judge was of the view that the claim of the
petitioner was not admitted by the respondent and hence the
same was disputed. The allegation of the respondent is also to
the effect that the petitioner has not executed any work and
has managed to create false documents of execution of work in
connivance with the office clerk posted in the office of the
respondent department. In view of these facts, the learned
Single Judge was pleased to dismiss the writ petition granting
liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy, for
redressal of his grievance.
Having heard the counsel for the parties in the
light of the order passed by the learned Single Judge, we find
no infirmity in the view taken by the learned Single Judge so as
to interfere with the same as the view taken by him is perfectly
in consonance with the settled legal position regarding non-
entertaining of a writ petition involving disputed question of
fact, for which this appeal has been filed. The relationship
between the petitioner and the respondents is claimed to be
contractual in nature, which also is disputed. Under the
circumstance, the writ petition has rightly not been entertained
for adjudicating the dispute of a factual nature. The appeal,
accordingly, is dismissed at the admission stage itself.
(GYAN SUDHA MISRA, C.J.)
( R. R. PRASAD, J. )
SI/