Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010024982020 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/776/2020 TOROP ALI S/O LATE MOJIBOR RAHMAN, R/O VILL-NO. 2 BALADMARI CHAR, P.O.- GOALPARA, P.S.-GOALPARA, DIST-GOALPARA, ASSAM, PIN-783101 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6 2:THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT GOVT. OF INDIA NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL OFFICE HOUSEFED COMPLEX BELTOLA BASISTHA ROAD GUWAHATI-5 REPRESENTED BY RESPONDENT NO. 3 3:DR. NIKHIL KUMAR EDUCATION OFFICER UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT GOVT. OF INDIA NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL OFFICE HOUSEFED COMPLEX BELTOLA BASISTHA ROAD GUWAHATI-5 Page No.# 2/4 4:WEST GOALPARA COLLEGE REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL CUM SECRETARY WEST GOALPARA COLLEGE GOALPARA ASSAM P.O.-BULARBHITA P.S.-GOALPARA DIST-GOLAPARA ASSAM PIN-783129 5:THE PRESIDENT GOVERNING BODY OF WEST GOALPARA COLLEGE P.O.-BULARBHITA P.S.-GOALPARA DIST-GOLAPARA ASSAM PIN-78312 For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. H. Das, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Upamainyu, R-1 :Ms. S. Baruah, R-2 : Ms. R. Choudhury, R-4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 24.04.2026 Heard Mr. H. Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Upamainyu, learned counsel for the respondent No.1, Ms. S. Baruah, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Page No.# 3/4 claiming an amount of Rs.8,50,000/- from the respondent Nos. 4 and 5. The materials which have been enclosed to the writ petition do not prima-facie goes to show that the petitioner have been able to make out a case for a direction for issuance of a writ upon the respondent authorities, more particularly, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 for releasing the amount as claimed by the petitioner. A perusal of Annexure-II which is enclosed to the writ petition mentions is the work order as claimed by the petitioner and from a perusal of the said work order, there is no mention whatsoever as to what is the consideration for which the work is to be carried out by the petitioner. It only mentions about construction of a women hostel under UGC grant within a period of 120 days and the payment will be made upon progress of the work. No document has been placed before this Court which would substantiate the completion of work by the petitioner. 3. Considering the above, this Court is not inclined to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution in the present facts and circumstance of the case. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed. Before parting with the record, the Court however observes that the dismissal of the instant writ petition shall not prejudice or preclude the petitioner to approach the concerned competent Court of Civil Page No.# 4/4 jurisdiction, if so advised and permissible under law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant