Gauhati High Court
Atul Basumatary vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 8 April, 2021
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010141342020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3997/2020
ATUL BASUMATARY
S/O LATE BIPUN BASUMATARY
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MURMELA. NH 31
PI MURMELA
PS BARAMA
DIST BAKSA
ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
OF ASSAM PUBLIC WORK (ROAD) DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI 6 ASSAM
2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL
KOKRAJHAR ASSAM
3:THE JOINT SECRETARY
BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL
KOKRAJHAR
ASSAM
4:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF ENGINEER
PWD
BTC KOKRAJHAR
ASSAM
5:THE DIRECTOR CUM CHD
PWD
BTC
KOKRAJHAR
ASSAM
Page No.# 2/4
6:THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER
PWD
(R AND B)
CIRCLE
BTC
KOKRAJHAR ASSAM
7:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PWD
MUSHALPUR
(R AND B) DIVISION
MUSHALPUR
------------
Advocate for : MRS A BUJARBARUAH
Advocate for : SC
PWD appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 08-04-2021
Heard Ms. A. Bujarbaruah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Nayak, learned
Standing Counsel, Public Works Department (PWD) as well as Bodoland Territorial Council
(BTC) for all the respondents.
2. The petitioner is a registered Class 1A category contractor under the PWD. The
petitioner was awarded a formal work order on 09.02.2016 for a contract work viz.
"Improvement of road from Tihu Barama road to Haramjhar Road via Mahkhuli Bodo Chuba &
Chapra under Baksa District for the year 2014-15" ('the subject-work', for short) and the value
of the contract work was mentioned Rs. 43,82,000/-. On receipt of the formal work order, the
petitioner proceeded to execute the work. When the execution of the subject-work was in
progress, the respondent no. 7 inspected the subject-work and after such inspection, he
submitted an Inspection Report wherein it was certified that the subject-work was completed
to the extent of 74.68% on the date of his inspection. Accordingly, the respondent no. 7 had
issued an Advice slip for payment of an amount of Rs. 32,72,494/-. After completion of the
subject-work to the aforesaid extent, the petitioner submitted his bills and according to him,
Page No.# 3/4
an amount of Rs. 32,72,494/- is yet to be paid by the respondent authorities. Aggrieved
thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court by this writ petition seeking a direction to
the respondent authorities to sanction and disburse the said amount of Rs. 32,72,494/-.
3. Mr. Nayak by referring to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no. 7 has
submitted that there is no denial of the fact of execution of the subject-work by the petitioner
to the aforesaid extent but fund could not be released till date. As per the sanction order
issued by the respondent no. 3, the Pro-forma Bill was submitted for drawal of the sanctioned
amount of Rs. 32,72,494/- but the PLA cheque has not been released by the BTC authority. It
has further been assured that the payment would be made to the petitioner as and when the
cheque is issued by the BTC authority.
4. The learned counsel for the parties have submitted that the instant case is squarely
covered by the Full Bench judgment of this Court, rendered on 29.09.2008, in Writ Appeal
No. 484/2005 [Tamsher Ali and Ors. vs. State of Assam and Ors.], reported in 2008(4) GLT 1
(FB) and similar other 194 writ petitions. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for
the respondents that as regards the bill amount found admissible to the petitioner, the
respondent authorities will process the claim of the petitioner in the light of the principles
enunciated in the aforesaid judgment.
5. In view of the above submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ
petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself with a direction to the respondent no. 4
i.e. the Additional Chief Engineer, PWD, BTC, Kokrajhar, Assam to examine the claim of the
petitioner within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order
and, then, if the claim is found admissible, the respondent authorities in consultation with the
respondent no. 2 i.e. the Principal Secretary, BTC, Kokrajhar, Assam would process the claim
of the petitioner to the extent admissible in accordance with law and in the light of the
directions contained in Tamsher Ali (supra).
6. The petitioner shall submit a certified copy of this order, to the respondent no. 4, the
Additional Chief Engineer, PWD, BTC, Kokrajhar, Assam for his doing the needful.
The writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the above directions.
Page No.# 4/4
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
