Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010072892019 2025:GAU-AS:9300 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2263/2019 M/S. VIDURS REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI VIVEK SHARMA, SON OF SRI OM PRAKASH SHARMA, SENAPATI BOULEVARD, SREENAGAR, R.G. BARUAH ROAD, GUWAHATI- 781005. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. REP. BY THE SECRETARY, GOVT. OF ASSAM, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PAN BAZAR GUWAHATI- 781001. 3:COMMISSIONER GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PAN BAZAR GUWAHATI- 781001. 4:ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER GARAGE BRANCH GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION GUWAHATI- 781007 Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. G Jalan Page No.# 2/4 Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. S Bora Standing Counsel, GMC B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER 18.07.2025 Heard Mr. G Jalan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S Bora, learned Standing Counsel, GMC. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner challenging the inaction on the part of the Respondent Authorities in releasing the unpaid bill amounting to Rs.6,77,822/- to which the Petitioner is entitled to in respect of the work order allotted to him for supply of Falcon Fogging Machine (Vehicle Mounted) 1 No. and Neptune Fogging Machine (Portable) 3 Nos. by the Commissioner, GMC, Guwahati. 3. The case of the Petitioner herein is that the Petitioner supplied in pursuance to the work order dated 09.09.2016, which fact has been admitted by the Assistant Engineer in the Garage Branch of the Guwahati Municipal Corporation, who had duly acknowledged the receipt of the supply after due verification. However, inspite of the petitioner submitting the final bills before the respondent authorities for release of the outstanding dues amounting to Rs.6,77,822/- the amount has not been released. The petitioner made several requests from time to time for release of the aforesaid outstanding dues, but Page No.# 3/4 the same has not yielded any result. Consequently, finding no other alternatives, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the instant writ petition. 4. Mr. S Bora, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents submitted that there is no denial to the fact that the supply order in question was issued to the Petitioner. The learned counsel for the Respondents, however, submitted that the entitlement of the Petitioner would depend upon 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 supplied the materials, the Petitioner would be entitled to the amount. However, for the same, verification on the part of the Respondent Authorities would be required. 6. This Court further finds it relevant to observe that the Petitioner claims that he had supplied materials of the value amounting to Rs.6,77,822/- (Rupees Six Lakhs, Seventy Seven Thousand, Eight Hundred Twenty Two only) and this Court in exercise of the writ jurisdiction cannot decide as to whether the Petitioner would be entitled to the amount so claimed. 7. Taking into account the above, this Court directs the Respondent Authorities to verify the entitlement of the Petitioner and the Respondent Authorities if upon verification finds that the Petitioner is entitled to any amount, the same be paid to him. 8. The said exercise be completed within a period of 6 (six) months from the date a certified copy of the instant order is served upon the Commissioner GMC, Guwahati. 9. With above observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. Page No.# 4/4 JUDGE Comparing Assistant