Monir Uddin Khandokar vs The State Of Assam And 8 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 4292 Gua

                                                              Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010149182018




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

                         Case No.: WP(C)/2329/2018

         MONIR UDDIN KHANDOKAR
         S/O- ABDUL KARIM KHANDAKAR
         R/O- BHIMPARA
         P.O- HATSINGIMARI
         P.S- SOUTH SALMARA
         DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR- 783135


          VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS.
         REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM
         PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT
         JANATA BHAWAN
         C BLOCK
         2ND FLOOR
         DISPUR
         GUWAHATI
         ASSAM- 781006

         2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
         SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR
          HATSINGIMARI DIST
          P.O HATSINGIMARI
          P.S- SOUTH SALMARA
          DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR DIST
          HATSINGIMARI
          3:THE CIRCLE OFFICER
         MANKACHAR REVENUE CIRCLE OFFICE
          4:THE PRESIDENT
         FEKAMARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT
          FEKAMARI
          DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR DIST
          HATSINGIMARI
                                                                       Page No.# 2/4

           5:SABAN KUMAR SAHA
           S/O- NEPAL CHANDRA SAHA
           VILL- MAHAMAYA NAGAR
           DIST- SOUTH SALMARA
           MANKACHAR
           6:SAMIUL ISLAM
           S/O- SAYED ALI SARKAR
           VILL- BHIMAPARA
           DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR
           7:SWAPAN SUTRADHAR
           S/O- NEPAL SUTRADHAR
           VILL- MAHAMAYA NAGAR
           DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR
           8:AKHERUZZAMAN SHIKH
           S/O- MUSLEM UDDIN SHEIKH
           VILL- PURAN MUKHCHAR
           DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR
           9:ASRAFUL ISLAM
           S/O-HAJI ABDUL HAMID
           VILL- BUSAKATA
           DIST- SOUTH SALMARA
           MANKACHAR


For the petitioner (s)      : Mr. A. Ali, Advocate

For the respondent (s)   : Mr. P. Nayak, SC, PWD

                                BEFORE
                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
                               ORDER

13.10.2023

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in releasing the outstanding contractual bill amount of Rs.9,06,628/- to which the petitioner is entitled to upon completion of the works allotted to him by the Executive Engineer, PDW, Jorhat Division.

2. The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner is the Page No.# 3/4

proprietor of M/S Mahanta Electrical situated at Cinamara Jorhat, Assam and he is a contractor by profession in the Department of PWD having its licence No.2768. It is the further case of the petitioner that the Executive Engineer of PWD, Jorhat Divisional Office issued an work order dated 24- 12-2007 to complete various works, and accordingly, the petitioner completed those works and his contractual works were duly inspected by the respondents and found to be correct and thereafter the completion certificates were issued to him.

3. It is alleged that on completion of the works in a time bound manner, the petitioner submitted the final bill for release of the outstanding bill amount of Rs.9,06,628/-. The petitioner is, however, aggrieved that in spite of submission of the necessary documents and completion of the work, the respondent authorities have not made payment to the petitioner's entitlement. It is under such circumstances, the instant writ petition has been filed.

4. Mr. P. Nayak,, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent PWD submits that the entitlement of the petitioner would be dependent upon further verification to be carried out by the respondent authorities.

5. Upon perusal of the materials on record, this Court is of the opinion that if the petitioner had completed the works in question, the petitioner would be entitled to the amount as claimed. However, for the same, verification on the part of the respondent authorities would be required.

6. This Court, therefore, disposes of the instant writ petition with a direction upon the respondent authorities to verify as to whether the Page No.# 4/4

petitioner had completed the works in question as per the allotment of the works and also as to whether the petitioner had submitted requisite documents which are required for the purpose of releasing the amount claimed by the petitioner.

7. This Court further directs that upon verification, if it is found that the petitioner is entitled to, the respondent authorities shall pay to the petitioner the entitlement as per the directions contained in the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in Tamsher Ali vs. State of Assam & Others.

8. The said exercise for verification be completed with a period of 30 (thirty) from the date a certified copy of the instant order is served upon the respondent No.2.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant