THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Pabitra Kalita, S/o. Late Harendra Kalita – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Assam, Represented By The Principal Secy. Home And Political Deptt., And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) 4696 of 2025
Decided On : 01-12-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's claim for payment of hire charges. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. respondent's response and claim adjustment. (Para 6) |
| 3. court's recognition of petitioner's entitled amount. (Para 7) |
| 4. court's order for payment and procedural directives. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. A. Deka, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Ms. U. Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondents.
2. The instant petition has been filed being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the Respondent Authorities in not making payment of the bills of the Petitioner.
3. The Petitioner herein is a reputed entrepreneur and is engaged in the business of providing vehicles for hire across the State of Assam to various Government as well as private organizations.
4. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that a Maruti Gypsy vehicle bearing No. AS-01-DR-4361, belonging to the Petitioner was hired by the Respondent Authorities during various periods between 2022 and 2024 and the rates were fixed by the Respondent Authorities as per the notification dated 06.02.2014 issued by the Transport Department, Government of Assam
5. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Additional District Magistrate, Kamrup (M), requisitioned the aforesaid vehicle on hire basis for the periods mentioned above and it was also deployed by Respondent No.2 for police services. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that for the periods from 01.01.2022 to 30.06.2022, 01.07.2022 to 31.12.2022, 01.01.2023 to 31.03.2023, 01.10.2023 to 30.11.2023, 01.12.2023 to 31.12.2023 and 01.01.2024 to 31.12.2024, Respondent No. 2 had admittedly generated hire charge bills amounting to Rs.9,00,058/-. It was submitted that despite Respondent No.2 itself having raised the hire charge bills, the said amount of Rs.9,00,058/- has not been released to the Petitioner. The learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that the Petitioner had submitted a representation on 06.06.2025 to the Respondent Authorities seeking release of the amount however the said amount of Rs.9,00,058/- is still pending, for which the Petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
6. Ms. U. Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate during the course of hearing submitted that an affidavit-in-opposition has been filed by the Respondent No.2 wherein at Paragraph Nos. 6 and 7, it has been categorically mentioned that the Petitioner is entitled to an amount of Rs.8,11,498/- and not Rs.9,00,058/-. Taking into account its relevance, this Court reproduces the Paragraph Nos. 6 and 7 herein under:
“6. That with regard to the statement made in paragraph no.5 of the writ petition, the answering deponent begs to state that to ascertain the correctness of the claimed of outstanding dues of Rs.9,00,058/- needs to be examined with the concerned records:
The facts reveals from the records as well as examination of the bills received during the period from 2022 to 2024 are as follows:-
(i) The verification of concerned records reveals that the petitioner had in fact claimed excess amount of Rs.88,560/- (Rupees Eighty Eight thousand Five hundred and Sixty) only, whereas the actual outstanding dues was Rs.8,11,498/- (Rupees Eight Lakh Eleven thousand four hundred and Ninety Eight) only. Accordingly, all the 9 (nine) numbers of hire charge bills have been scrutinized with the records available for taking further follow up steps.
(ii) After completion of required formalities, these bills have been forwarded to the Sanctioning Authority, i.e. Assam Police Headquarters to accord approval of sanction and allotment of fund. The proposals forwarded to the authority are as follows:
Proposal No.2111-2118 (RV) dated 08.09.2025.


Proposal No.2228(RV) dated 31.10.2025.

7. That with regards to the statements made in paragraph No.6 of the writ petition, the deponent begs to state that bills pertaining to the amount of Rs.8,11,498/
The authority's acknowledgment of a specific owed amount obligates prompt payment under Article 226, while procedural steps for fund release must be adhered to.
Where state authorities admit liability for services rendered, the court may exercise its writ jurisdiction to direct the disbursement of the admitted amount within a specified timeframe to ensure th....
Governmental authorities are obligated to honor undisputed claims for payment, particularly in public service requisition scenarios, and must process these claims expediently.
Government authorities must promptly pay admitted outstanding dues for services rendered, preventing undue hardship to claimants.
When state authorities admit liability for services rendered, they are obligated to discharge the debt. The court may exercise writ jurisdiction to direct the payment of such admitted outstanding due....
The court affirmed that an accepted payment claim creates an obligation on authorities to disburse the amount promptly to avoid undue hardship to the claimant.
Government authorities must comply with contractual obligations by ensuring timely payment for services rendered, preventing undue hardship on service providers.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.