Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010139632023 2025:GAU-AS:12827 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3716/2023 MAHBUBUR RAHMAN S/O LATE ABDUL RAQUIB AHMED, VILL- DALOPAR, P.O.-ASHALKANDI- 788723, DIST- KARIMGANJ, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS (REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6) 2:THE COMMISSIONER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM P.W.D. DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.OF ASSAM REVENUE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 4:THE CHIEF ENGINEER P.W.D. (ROADS) ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3 5:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PWD (ROADS) CACHAR CIRCLE SILCHAR DIST-CACHAR ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 6:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER P.W.D. (ROADS) KARIMGANJ DIVISION KARIMGANJ ASSA For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. B. Malakar, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Gogoi, Addl. A.G. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 17.09.2025 The instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the inaction on the part of the Respondent Authorities in releasing the dues to which the petitioner is entitled to upon completion of the work allotted to him by the Superintending Engineer, P.W.D. (Roads), Cachar Circle, Silchar for “Improvement of Road from Natun Bazar to Sonatola under PWD, Karimganj Rural Roads Division, Karimganj District”. 2. The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner has completed the said work. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner successfully executed the work and accordingly submitted the bills for the same. According to the petitioner, out of the total amount of Rs. 38,68,047/-, a sum of Rs. 16,70,429/- has already been paid, and the petitioner is Page No.# 3/4 entitled to the remaining amount of Rs. 21,97,618/-. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had submitted various representations to the Respondent Authorities for release of the amount however, the said amount of Rs. 21,97,618/- is still pending, for which, the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. Mr. B. Gogoi, the learned Additional Advocate General, Assam appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that there is no denial to the fact that the work in question was not allotted to the petitioner. The learned Additional Advocate General, Assam for the respondents however submitted that the entitlement of the petitioner would be dependent upon further verification to be carried out by the Respondent Authorities. 5. Upon hearing the learned counsels for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the interest of justice would be met if a direction is given to the Respondent Authorities to verify, as to whether, the petitioner has completed the work in question mentioned hereinabove and thereupon to ascertain the exact amount to which the petitioner is entitled to, if any. 6. It is under such circumstances, this Court therefore disposes of the instant writ petition thereby directing the Respondent Page No.# 4/4 Authorities to verify the entitlement of the petitioner on the basis of the tender conditions as well as the formal work order which was issued in favour of the petitioner and, as to whether, the petitioner has completed the work in question and thereupon, after verification if it is found that the petitioner is entitled to any amount, the same should be paid to the petitioner in terms with the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Tamsher Ali and Others Vs. State of Assam and others reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1. The said verification be completed within a period of 1 (one) month from the date, a certified copy of the instant order is served upon the respondent No.4 i.e. the Chief Engineer, P.W.D. (Roads), Assam, Chandmari, Guwahati. 7. With above observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant