GAHC010192282025 2025:GAU-AS:16930

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/5042/2025

ASZAD HUSSAIN

S/O- SALAM MIA, R/O- VILL.- KABARIBOND, P.O. PATHARKANDI, DIST.

SRIBHUMI, ASSAM, PIN- 788724.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DEPARTMENT, DISPUR,

GUWAHATI-6.

2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER

PWD (ROADS)

ASSAM

CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3.

3:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

PWRD

PATHARKANDI AND R.K. NAGAR TERRITORIAL ROAD DIVISION

RAMKRISHNA NAGAR

P.O. RAMKRISHNA NAGAR

DIST. SRIBHUMI

ASSAM

PIN- 788712.

4:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM

FINANCE DEPARTMENT

JANATA BHAWAN

DISPUR

GUWAHATI-6

Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. K Uddin Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. NR Sarma, Standing Counsel, BTC Mr. B Gogoi Addl. AG, Assam B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

ORDER

08.12.2025 The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in not making payment of the amount to which the petitioner is entitled to upon completion of the contractual supply work allotted to him by the respondent authorities.

2. The case of the petitioner herein is that he had duly supplied the Office Stationery Materials to the Office of the respondent authorities. The petitioner thereafter on completion of the supply work submitted a bill of an amount of Rs.1,78,042/-. However, the said payment had not been made to the petitioner till date, for which, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the instant writ petition.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had successfully supplied the Office Stationery Materials to the satisfaction of the respondent authorities within the stipulated time frame. In that regard, the respondent authorities had also issued liability statement in favour of the petitioner. In spite of the same, the petitioner has not been paid his dues. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had made several representations before the respondent authorities for release of the said amount, however, the amount of Rs.1,78,042/-. is still pending.

4. Mr. NR Sarma, the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the BTC submits that as to whether the petitioner has completed the work in question is a subject matter of verification which needs to be carried out by the respondent authorities and it is only on the basis of such verification, the actual entitlement of the petitioner can be ascertained.

5. Upon hearing the learned counsels for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be met if a direction is given to the respondent authorities to verify as to whether the petitioner has completed the work in accordance with the work order mentioned hereinabove and thereupon to ascertain the exact amount to which the petitioner is entitled to, if any.

6. It is under such circumstances, this Court, therefore, disposes of the instant writ petition thereby directing the respondent authorities, more particularly, the respondent Nos.3, 6 and 7 to verify the entitlement of the petitioner on the basis of the work order which were issued in favour of the petitioner and as to whether the petitioner had completed the work in question and thereupon, after verification, if it is found that the petitioner is entitled to any amount, the same should be paid to the petitioner in terms with the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Tamsher Ali and Others Vs. State of Assam and others reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1. The said verification be completed within a period of 1 (one) month from the date a certified copy of the instant order is served upon the respondent No.5 and the payment thereupon be made in terms with the judgment rendered in the case of Tamsher Ali (supra).

7. With above observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant