AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 247 wordsArindam Sinha, J
W.P.(C) no.3939 of 2023 and I.A. no.1755 of 2023
Mr. Mohanty, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client’s name was included in the list of beneficiaries under the housing scheme. However, the subsequent list did not carry her name. His client made representation dated 7th December, 2022 to the Collector. He submits, there be direction for consideration of the representation, pending which there be restraint on the authority from disbursing the benefits. He submits, in event the benefits are disbursed to other beneficiaries without enlisting his client, his client will stand deprived.
On query from Court Mr. Mohanty submits, his client has not been told why her name not be included in the new list.
Mr. Nanda, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State and submits, the representation will be duly dealt with.
Opposite party no.1 is directed to consider and deal with petitioner’s representation dated 7th December, 2022. Petitioner will forthwith communicate this order and copy of the representation to said opposite party. In event said opposite party has not included petitioner’s name only on ground of limit in number of beneficiaries, disbursement of the benefits will remain stayed till two weeks after communication of the result of consideration. Otherwise, within three weeks from communication petitioner must be told as to why her name was not included or that it has since been included.
The writ petition is disposed of.
……………………………..