[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Madhya Pradesh State Powerloom Bunker ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 April, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11325
1 WP-7338-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 7 th OF APRIL, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 7338 of 2026
MADHYA PRADESH STATE POWERLOOM BUNKER SANGH
MARYADIT LIMITED R.K. MISHRA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Romesh Pratap Singh - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Dharmendra Nayak - GA for the respondents/State.
ORDER
The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has
been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:-
(1) This, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the nature of Mandamus directing
the respondent no. 5/ Collector, Vidisha, District Vidisha (M.P.) to decide pending representation
dated 05.09.2024, 30.09.2024 and 29.10.2025 (Annexure-P-13, Annexure-P-14 & Annexure-P-
15).
(II) This, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the nature of Mandamus directing
the respondent no. 4/ Chief Executive Officer, Madhya Pradesh State Rural Livelihood Mission,
to decide pending representation dated 02.05.2024 (Annexure-P-16).
(III) Any other appropriate relief which the Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper may kindly be
granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice.
(IV) Cost and may also be saddled on the Respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuance to the
demand/work orders issued by the competent authorities, the petitioner
federation supplied the entire quantity of raw material as required. It is
submitted that though part payment has been made, a substantial amount is
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11325
2 WP-7338-2026
still outstanding. Despite repeated representations dated 05.09.2024,
30.09.2024 and 29.10.2025 (Annexure P/13, P/14 and P/15) before
respondent No. 5/Collector, District Vidisha, and representation dated
02.05.2024 (Annexure P/16) before respondent No. 4, no decision has been
taken till date.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the grievance of
the petitioner would be redressed if a direction is issued to the concerned
respondents/competent authorities to consider and decide the aforesaid
pending representations within a stipulated time frame.
Learned counsel for the respondents/State submits that he has no
objection if such a direction is issued.
Considering the innocuous prayer made by the petitioner and without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is disposed of
with a direction to respondent No. 4 and respondent No. 5/competent
authority to consider and decide the petitioner's pending representations
dated 05.09.2024, 30.09.2024, 29.10.2025 and 02.05.2024 (Annexure P/13,
P/14, P/15 and P/16), in accordance with law, by passing a reasoned and
speaking order, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of
a certified copy of this order.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the
merits of the case and the competent authorities shall decide the matter
independently in accordance with law.
It is further clarified that the aforesaid direction has been issued in
view of the limited and innocuous prayer made by the petitioner; however, it
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11325
3 WP-7338-2026
is made clear that such direction shall not be construed as conferring
jurisdiction upon this Court in respect of any decision taken by the
authorities situated at Burhanpur, and the competent authority shall act
strictly within its territorial and legal jurisdiction in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
neetu
