Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010146802021 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4939/2021 M/S. DUTTA ENTERPRISES REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI SWARUP KANTI DUTTA, S/O LATE SADHAN CHANDRA DUTTA, RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 32-A UTTAR PUB GITA NAGAR, PANIKHAITI ROADM NOONMATI, GUWAHATI 781020 VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS, SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI 110001 2:HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN HINDUSTAN BHAWAN 8 SHOORJI VALLABHDAS MARG BALLARD ESTATE MUMBAI 400001 3:HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPOARATION LIMITED A GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 17 JAMSEDJI TATA ROAD MUMBAI 4000020 INDIA 4:CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER (RETIAL SALES) HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED GUWAHATI RETAIL REGIONAL OFFICE H.D COMPLEX 2ND FLOOR JANAPATH Page No.# 2/3 G.S ROAD ULUBARI GUWAHATI 78100 For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. D. Dey, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. M. R. Islam, Standing Counsel BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 22.10.2025 Heard Mr. D. Dey, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. M. R. Islam, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. 2. The Petitioner herein is aggrieved by the actions on the part of the Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 in not making payment of an amount of Rs.25,22,448.85p which the Petitioner claims to be entitled to on the ground that the Petitioner had carried out various works to the satisfaction of the Respondent Authorities. 3. It is seen that pursuant to the notice which has been issued, the Respondent Authorities had filed an affidavit-in-opposition on 11.06.2024. In the said affidavit-in-opposition, it has been categorically stated that the Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are liable to pay only an amount of Rs.47,415.61p and the remaining amount which the Petitioner claims is being seriously disputed. 4. It is further seen that the writ petitioner thereupon has not filed any reply to the said affidavit-in-opposition even after a period of one year. Page No.# 3/3 5. Considering the above, it is therefore the opinion of this Court that there being serious disputes raised about the Petitioner’s entitlement on facts except the amount of Rs.47,415.61p, this Court cannot pass appropriate directions thereby directing the Respondent Authorities to make the payment of the amount as claimed by the Petitioner. However, it is also the opinion of this Court that the Petitioner has been diligently pursuing the present writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions: (i) The Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are jointly and severally directed to pay the Petitioner an amount of Rs.47,415.61p within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon the Respondent No.4. (ii) As regards the remaining amount which the Petitioner claims, the Petitioner would be at liberty to approach the competent Civil Court. The period during which the instant writ petition has been pending i.e. from 10.09.2021 till date be excluded while computing the period of limitation. (iii) The dismissal of the prayer of the Petitioner in respect of the entire amount as claimed by the Petitioner by way of the present order shall not prejudice the Petitioner before the competent Civil Court, if any proceedings are initiated. JUDGE Comparing Assistant