SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(MP) 628

A.K.SHRIVASTAVA
Baijnath Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Aditya Adhikari, S.K.Yadav,

Judgment

( 1. ) BY this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the pregnability of the Revenue Recovery Certificate (hereinafter referred to as rrc) dated 19-8-99 (Annexure P-1) being void, illegal and against the law. The petitioner has further prayed to declare by appropriate writ or order that the impugned action of the respondents is arbitrary, illegal and without any authority, power and jurisdiction.

( 2. ) AS per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is a B-class contractor. He entered into an agreement with the respondents for construction of Dammari approach road from 0 km. to 3 kms. His tender was accepted being the lowest and he was directed to complete the work within 4 months, i. e. , upto 30-9-1984. The petitioner commenced his work from 1-4-1984 and looking to the approaching rainy season completed maximum possible work. The petitioner, on the basis of accepted measurement, submitted his first running bill to the tune of Rs. 3,47,895/which is 80% of the total amount of contract.

( 3. ) AS per the petitioner, the work undertaken by him was earth work collection of morram with boxing, spreadi




























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top