[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
M/S Dra Ktee (Jv) vs The State Of Assam And Othrs on 20 February, 2026
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010027462026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/905/2026
M/S DRA KTEE (JV)
A JOINT VENTURE OF DINESH CHANDRA R AGARWAL, INFRACON PVT
LTD, AHMEDABAD AND TK ENGINEERING ENTERPRISES, NAHARLAGUN,
OFFICE AT MODEL VILL NAHARLAGUN, ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND
PRESENTLY OPERATING FROM GAMES VILLAGE, FLAT NO A3, 202,
GUWAHATI, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHRS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL SECRETARY TO
THE GOVT OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS BUILDINGS AND NATIONAL
HIGHWAYS DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006
2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
NH WORKS
ASSAM 781003
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI
3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORK DEPARTMENT
GUWAHATI NH CIRCLE
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI 781003
4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
NAGAON NH DIVISION
NAGAON
ASSAM 782001
Page No.# 2/5
5:THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PWD
NORTH LAKHIMPUR NH SUB DIVISION
NORTH LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
PIN 787001
6:M/S KHUSHI CONSTRUCTIONS
OFFICE AT BAJAJ COMPLEX
NT ROAD
WARD NO 10 NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DIST NORTH LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR SRI VISHAL BAJAJ
RO NT ROAD
WARD NO 1 NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DIST NORTH LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
PIN 787001
7:SHRI RAMESH BAJAJ
NT ROAD
WARD NO 1 NORTH LAKHIMPUR
DIST NORTH LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
PIN 78700
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M SHARMAH, MR. T NATH,MR B HAZARIKA,MR V
KUMAR,MR B PATHAK
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PWD,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 20.02.2026
Heard Mr. B. Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Gogoi,
learned Additional Advocate General, Assam for the respondent nos. 1 - 5.
Page No.# 3/5
2. The petitioner was awarded a contract work, 'Construction of proposed
North Lakhimpur By-pass from existing Km 338/924.00 to Km 349/213 of NH-52
in the State of Assam [Job No. 052-AS-2011-12-099]' ['the Contract-Work', for
short] by the respondent Public Works [NH-Works] Department, Assam. When
the petitioner met certain obstacles in the course of execution of the Contract-
Work, it inducted the respondent no. 6 as working partner by entering into a
Memorandum of Understanding [MoU] with the respondent no. 6 on
11.01.2021.
3. As certain disputes regarding disputes with respects to shares in the
amount receivable from the principal i.e. Public Works [NH-Works] Department
arose, the respondent no. 6 approached this Court by way of a writ petition,
W.P.[C] no. 4977/2025. On 29.08.2025, the Court disposed of the writ petition
after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent Public
Works [NH-Works] Department authorities in the motion stage without issuing
notice to the petitioner herein, who was impleaded as party-respondent no. 6 in
the writ petition. By Order dated 29.08.2025, the writ petition was disposed of
with a direction to the respondent Public Works [NH-Works] Department, more
particularly, the respondent no. 2 therein, also the respondent no. 2 herein, to
dispose of a Representation dated 11.04.2025 submitted by the petitioner
therein i.e. the respondent no. 6 herein after affording due opportunity of
hearing to all the parties within a period of one month therefrom. It was further
observed that, in the event, the petitioner would be found entitled to be paid an
outstanding amount of Rs. 12,50,00,000/- for executing a part of the Contract-
Work, either directly to the petitioner or through the main contractor, then the
same shall be released accordingly.
Page No.# 4/5
4. It is thereafter a Speaking Order has been passed by the respondent no.
2 on 31.12.2025 whereby the respondent no. 2 has directed to make payment
towards the balance amount of the Contract-Work to the account of the
respondent no. 6 herein, as agreed to by both the parties before him. Aggrieved
by the impugned Speaking Order dated 31.12.2025, the instant writ petition is
preferred.
5. Mr. Pathak has submitted that there was no consent from the present
petitioner to the effect that the amount can be paid directly to the respondent
no. 6. He has further submitted that no amount has been disbursed till date in
favour of the respondent no. 6 pursuant to the Speaking Order. It is his
contention that the direction is unreasonable as there was/is no direct relation
between the principal and the respondent no. 6 in connection with the Contract-
Work.
6. Mr. Gogoi has sought time to obtain the instructions in the matter.
7. The matter would require consideration.
8. Issue notice, returnable on 16.03.2026.
9. As Mr. Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam has appeared
and accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 - 5, issuance of formal
notices to the said respondents are dispensed with. However, extra copies of the
writ petition along with annexures are to be furnished to Mr. Gogoi by tomorrow.
Page No.# 5/5
10. The learned counsel for the petitioner shall take steps for service of notice
upon the respondent nos. 6 & 7 by speed post within 2 [two] working days from
today.
11. Heard the learned counsel for the parties on the interim prayer.
12. From the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the materials brought on record, it prima facie appears that there is no direct
relation between the respondent Public Works [NH-Works] Department and the
respondent no. 6 with regard to the contract-work. The respondent no. 6
appears to have executed the Contract-Work with the petitioner on the strength
of a Memorandum of Outstanding [MoU] dated 11.01.2021, which was only
brought to the knowledge of the respondent authorities in the Public Works
[NH-Works] Department. In such view of the matter, it is ordered, in the interim,
that the Speaking Order dated 31.12.2025 shall not be given effect to, till the
returnable date, if the balance amount pursuant to the Speaking Order dated
31.12.2025 has not been not released till date.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
