Minabati Islary vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 1730 Gua

                                                            Page No.# 1/6

GAHC010095912022




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

                         Case No. : WP(C)/3355/2022

         MINABATI ISLARY
         W/O- UPENDRA ISLARY,
         R/O- VILLAGE BAMUNGAON
         P.O- DUTTAPUR
         DIST- CHIRANG, BTR, ASSAM



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.
         REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, TO THE
         GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS),
         DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06

         2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
          PWD (ROADS)
         ASSAM
          CHANDMARI
          GUWAHATI-03

         3:THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL
          REP. BY THE SECRETARY
          BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL

         P.O AND DIST-KOKRAJHAR
          PIN-783370
         ASSAM

         4:THE ADDL. CHIEF ENGINEER CUM DIRECTOR
          PWD
          BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL

         P.O AND DIST-KOKRAJHAR
                                                                        Page No.# 2/6

             BTR
             PIN-783370
             ASSAM

             5:THE DIRECTOR
              PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
              BTR

             P.O AND DIST-KOKRAJHAR
              PIN-783370
             ASSAM

             6:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
              SIDLI
              CHIRANG DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
              SIDLI

             DIST- CHIRANG
             PIN-783393
             BTR
             ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR R DHAR

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P W D




                                     BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

                                          ORDER

Date : 23-05-2022

Heard Mr. B.C. Muchahary, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Public Works Department for the respondent nos. 1 & 2; and Mr. S.R. Rabha, learned Standing Counsel, BTC for the respondent nos. 3-6.

2. The subject-matter in this writ petition is execution of a contract work viz. 'Construction of Eangkorbari Naodra at Engkorbari Bamungaon, under CD Page No.# 3/6

fund for the year 2015-16' ['the Contract-Work', for short] and non-disbursal of an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- in favour of the petitioner which the petitioner has claimed to be due from the authorities in the BTC.

3. The case projected by the petitioner in this writ petition, in brief, is that the petitioner was awarded the Contract-Work by a Work Order dated 26.05.2016 [Annexure-3]. The Administrative Approval for the Contract-Work was accorded on 29.01.2016 [Annexure-1] and the Technical Sanction for the Contract-Work was given on 25.04.2016 [Annexure-2]. The petitioner has asserted that after completion of all the requisite formalities, he proceeded to execute the Contract-Work as per the specifications, drawings and agreement and completed the same. The authorities in the respondent BTC physically verified the Contract-Work and found that the Contract-Work had been completed as per the specifications, drawings, and agreement. In that connection, the respondent authorities had issued one Completion Certificate [Annexure-5]. After completion of the Contract-Work, the respondent authorities had also issued an Inspection Report [Annexure-6] and a Handling Over and Taking Over Certificate [Annexure-7]. After completion of the Contract-Work, the respondent authorities had also issued an Advice Slip for payment for a total amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- [Annexure-8]. The petitioner had thereafter, submitted the final bill amounting to Rs. 3,00,000/- but the amount has not been disbursed till date.

4. Mr. Rabha, learned Standing Counsel, BTC has submitted that though from the documents annexed to this writ petition, it is prima facie reflected that the petitioner had completed the Contract-Work but still there is requirement for Page No.# 4/6

verification of the matter. It is submitted that a decision has been taken by the respondent BTC authorities to examine all the pending claims relating to contract works and to that effect the respondent no. 3 had passed an order on 15.11.2021. As per the said order, the respondent BTC authorities have undertaken to examine all the cases relating to outstanding liabilities from the year 2011 onwards within a period of 6 [six] months from the date of issuance of the said order. Mr. Rabha has submitted that the case of the petitioner can be considered by undertaking an exercise in similar line like the one indicated in the order dated 15.11.2021. Mr. Rabha has placed a copy of the said order before this Court.

5. The order bearing No. BTC/F(Audit)/49/2021/Pt-I/1] dated Kokrajhar, the

15th November, 2021 reads as under :-

" BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL SECRETARIAT BODOFA NWGWR::KOKRAJHAR

No. BTC/F(Audit)49/2021/Pt-I/1 Dated- Kokrajhar, the 15th November, 2021

ORDER

WHEREAS it has been noticed that huge number of outstanding liabilities have been created by the erstwhile BTAD authority since 2011 to February, 2020 through contractual work orders to the Contractors/Suppliers, etc. under various entrusted departments of BTC without corresponding budget provisions

WHEREAS the outstanding liabilities created by the erstwhile BTAD authority are required to undergo detail examination and verification in the context of proposals of such works made, NIT, selection of successful bidders, quality of works, completion of works, fund position, part payment, etc.

WHEREAS it is further noticed that a good number of court cases have been filed before the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court as well as in the District Courts of respective Page No.# 5/6

District Jurisdictions under BTAD by the Contractors/Suppliers, etc. praying for release of payments to the Contractors/Suppliers, etc. against their respective work orders

WHEREAS, reportedly, out of the aforesaid contractual works, some part payments also made against portion of works completed by the Contractors/Suppliers, etc. by the erstwhile BTAD authority in certain cases. However, such fund flow does not follow any rationale and is found to be arbitrant

AND THEREFORE, in view of the above facts and circumstances, the BTC has decided to verify all such works by conducting comprehensive audit, financial verification and physical verification wherever applicable, against all such contractual works in the Govt. level and further to complete the whole exercise in this regard within 6 (six) months from the date of issue of this order. After verifying the same, if it is found that the claims are admissible after following all established financial norms, the same shall be processed in accordance with law and as per decision contained in Tamsher Ali and others vs. State of Assam and others reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1 accordingly. Furthermore, if instances of wrongdoing or misappropriation are found during such comprehensive audit, financial verification and physical verification wherever applicable, appropriate legal action would be taken against the persons/agencies/firms concerned in accordance with the applicable laws.

This order shall come into force with immediate effect."

6. Mr. Muchahary, learned counsel for the petitioner having gone through the order dated 15.11.2021, has submitted that the process regarding payment of the outstanding dues to the petitioner may be completed by undertaking a similar kind of exercise within the stipulated time period as mentioned in the said order.

7. Having considered the contents of the said order dated 15.11.2021 and the decision of the Full Bench judgment of this Court, rendered on 29.09.2008, Page No.# 6/6

in Writ Appeal No. 484/2005 [Tamsher Ali and Ors. vs. State of Assam and Ors.], and similar other 194 writ petitions reported in 2008 [4] GLT 1 [FB], it is considered appropriate that the respondent authorities in the respondent BTC shall undertake and complete similar kind of exercise, like the one mentioned in the order dated 15.11.2021, in respect of the claim of the petitioner also within a period of 3 [three] months. If after such exercise, the petitioner is found entitled to the amount of Rs. 3,00,000/-, as claimed herein, or any other amount, the same shall be released in favour of the petitioner in terms of the decision in Tamsher Ali [supra]. The petitioner shall submit a certified copy of this order to the respondent no. 3 i.e. the Secretary, Bodoland Territorial Council [BTC], Kokrajhar within 7 [seven] days from today for doing the needful by his office.

8. The writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the above observation and direction.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant