Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010095142024 2025:GAU-AS:8668 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2568/2024 TAPAN KR DAS S/O- LATE GUNARAM DAS, LACHITPUR, AMINGAON. P.O AND P.S- AMINGAON, DIST-KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN-781031 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS ASSAM KHANAPARA GUWAHATI-22 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP AMINGAON ASSAM PIN-781031 4:THE IN CHARGE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP AMINGAON ASSAM PIN-781031 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL JAIL GUWAHATI SARUSAJAI DIST- KAMRUP Page No.# 2/5 ASSAM PIN-781034 6:NIRANJAN BORA NAZIR O/O THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DIST-KAMRUP AMINGAON ASSAM PIN-781031 7:BIPUL CHANDRA KALITA PROPRIETOR GUWAHATI METRO TOURS AND TRAVELS H.NO-10 LAKHI PATH RUPNAGAR BYELANE-3 GUWAHATI-3 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M BHAGABATI, MS. B TALUKDAR,MS G BORA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR K GOGOI (SC, ASSAM),MR A CHOWDHURY (R-7),K BARMAN (R-6),MS P SINGH (R-6),MR. D BORAH (R-6) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER 26.06.2025 Heard Mr. M. Bhagabati, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1-5; Mr. D. Borah, learned counsel for the respondent No.6 and Mr. A. Chowdhury, learned counsel for the respondent No.7. 2. The petitioner’s case is that he is a registered owner of a vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-01-FC-0579, which was being used by the respondent authorities for transportation of under-trial prisoners for a number of years. Page No.# 3/5 However, by the impugned order dated 22.02.2024, the respondent authorities have released the petitioner’s vehicle and requested the petitioner to take over the released vehicle from the office of the respondent No.3. 3. The petitioner’s grievance is that when the petitioner’s vehicle has been used for a number of years by the respondents, the impugned order dated 22.02.2024 now requires the petitioner to provide the POL for his vehicle, which was not the case earlier. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner cannot be directed to provide the POL along with the vehicle for hire by the respondents. He accordingly submits that a direction should be issued to the respondent authorities to engage the petitioner’s vehicle and to provide the POL for his vehicle, while in use with the respondent authorities. 4. Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1-5 submits that the petitioner has been requested to take the vehicle back, as the respondents do not want to use the vehicle any longer, in view of the fact that the petitioner is not willing to provide the POL for his vehicle. However, the petitioner has not taken back his vehicle. He has also submitted letter No.E-17549 NAZ-19/12/ 2023/KNZ/12 dated 24.06.2025, issued by the District Commissioner, Kamrup, Amingaon, which states that the petitioner has been paid his bills amounting to Rs.29,60,384/- earlier and that upon verification, the remaining amount due to the petitioner, i.e., Rs.25,13,045/-, would be paid shortly. 5. Mr. M. Bhagabati, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has not taken possession of his vehicle earlier, in view of the fact that the dues of the petitioner were not being paid by the respondents. 6. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 7. The contents of the letter dated 24.06.2025 issued by the District Page No.# 4/5 Commissioner, Kamrup, Amingaon states as follows:- “Sub:- Submission of necessary instructions as sought, as per order dated-16/06/2025 passed in Writ petition No. 2568/2024 Shri Tapan Kr. Das vs The State of Assam & Ors. Ref:- Your Letter No. AS/GA/KG/2025/6130, dated-18/06/2025. Sir, With due respect, I would like to submit the following instructions as sought in your above referred letter as:- 1. It is mentioned that the pending liabilities towards Shri Tapan Kr. Das is 60 Lakhs which is an approximate amount only and the same is mentioned as approximate amount in the speaking order also passed in this regard Vide letter No.E-17549-NAZ-19/12/2023/KNZ, dated-30/01/2025 and in the meantime Rs. 29,60,384.00 was paid to the petitioner on 04.03.2025. And upon verification of the bills of the petitioner, the payable amount is now Rs. 25,13,045/- (Rupees twenty five lakhs thirteen thousand and forty five) only for the vehicle hiring and POL bills for the period July, 2021 to August, 2024 based on available bills & vouchers submitted by the petitioner which also include the vehicle hiring for the month of August, 2024 and POL bills for the month of Feb & March, 2024 and same is under process in this end for requirement of fund from Government. 2. That the undersigned has already communicated the Inspector General of Prisons, Assam, Khanapara Vide this office letter E-17549-NAZ- 19/12/2023/KNZ/144/67, dated-18/5/2024 and E-175-NAZ-19/12/2012/KNZ/10, dated-10/04/2025 demanding to release the payable amount. This is for favour of your kind information and necessary action. Encl: Demand to Concern Department is enclosed herewith.” 8. The letter dated 24.06.2025 issued by the District Commissioner, Kamrup, Amingaon is made a part of the record and marked as Annexure-X. Page No.# 5/5 9. In view of their being an admission made by the respondents that they are liable to pay to the petitioner the balance amount of Rs.25,13,045/- as hiring charges, the said amount should be paid to the petitioner by the respondents, within a period of 4(four) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 10. The petitioner is also directed to take possession of his vehicle from the respondents, as there cannot be any direction passed by this Court to the respondents, directing them to continue to use the petitioner’s vehicle on hire and by providing fuel for the said vehicle. If the petitioner is not agreeable to the terms and conditions for hire made by the respondents, no right accrues to the petitioner to have his vehicle hired by the respondents. The issue as to whether the respondents want to hire the vehicle of the petitioner in future, is left entirely to the discretion of the respondent authorities. 11. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant