Government authorities must ensure timely payment of acknowledged financial dues to prevent undue hardship to petitioners.

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

Heard Mr. R. Sharma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Ms. U. Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appears on behalf of the respondent respondents.

2. The instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the non-payment of the outstanding bill amount of amount of Rs.1,56,36,524/- for hiring the vehicles of the petitioner by the Respondent Authorities.

3. The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner is the owner of 23 numbers of vehicles bearing registration No. AS13C509 (R. Van); AS25AC5272 (Water tanker); AS25Q6718; (R. Van); AS02E8430 (M/Truck); AS16C2865 (Water Tanker); AS01JC0476 (Water Tanker); AS01FC4356 (Water Tanker); AS19C6067 (M/Truck); AS01EP5438 (M/ECCO); AS25CC9010 (M/Truck); AS01KC 9674 (Water Tanker); AS25Q6717 (R. Van); AS25EC5685 (Water tanker); AS01GC2148 (Water Tanker); AS01EC3208 (Water Tanker); AS19C6067 (M/Truck); AS01DU9295 (Bolero); AS01BT4058 (Innova); AS25R5852 (Indigo); AS01JC7180 (TATA Suno); AS01ET 2661 (Ertiga); AS01HC7823 (Magic) and AS01EX8151 (Bolero). The Respondent Authorities took the aforesaid vehicles on hire basis on different dates in the year 2022 to 2024 and released the same accordingly. The petitioner thereafter submitted the bill before the Respondent Authorities for making payment for an amount of Rs.1,56,36,524/- as hire charge. It is stated that though the Respondent Authorities had duly admitted the bill amount, however the said amount has not been disbursed to him till date. Hence the writ petition.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been pursuing the matter diligently with the respondents, but the Respondent Authorities have not shown any interest in making the payment of the admitted amount of Rs.1,56,36,524/- due to the petitioner for which the petitioner is facing hardship. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the Respondent Authorities have failed to discharge their duty in accordance with law and the same has caused prejudice to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition.

5. Ms. U. Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate submitted that an affidavit-in-opposition had been filed by the respondent No.2. Paragraph No.10(i); 10(ii) & 10(iii) of the said affidavit-in-opposition being relevant is reproduced herein under:-

“10. That with regard to the statements made in paragraph 12 of the writ petition, the answering deponent begs to state that to ascertain the correctness of the claimed, matter needs to be examined with the concerned records: -

The facts reveal from the examination of the bills submitted by the petitioner firm against the hiring of the vehicles on various dates during the period from 2020 to 2024 are as follows:-

(i) The verification of concerned records reveals that the petitioner has in fact submitted bills amounting to Rs. 1,58,92,398/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty-Eight Lakhs Ninety-Two thousand Three hundred and ninety-eight) only and not as per claimed of Rs-1,56,36,524/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty-Six Lakhs Thirty-Six thousand Five hundred and twenty-four) only as stated in this paragraph. Thereby, the petitioner had made less claimed of Rs. 2,55,874/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty-five thousand Eight hundred and seventy-four) only then the actual claimed.

(ii) The verification of records further reveals that an amount of Rs. 29,81,390/- only (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Eighty-One thousand Three hundred and ninety) only against 14 No's of bills has already been credited to the bank account of the petitioner. The details of the 14 numbers of bills already credited to the bank account of the peti