Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010168762016 2025:GAU-AS:3347 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/777/2016 M/S SHIVAM - BHARTIA JV A JOINT VENTURE CONSISTING OF SHIVAM TRANSCON PVT. LTD., HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT 59, ZOO, NARENGI ROAD, GEETANAGAR, GHY.-781021, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM AND BHARTIA INFRA PROJECTS LTD. HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT 201, ROYAL ARCADE, 2ND FLOOR, DR. B BARUAH ROAD, ULUBARI, GHY.-781007, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM, REP. BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SRI SHANKAR CHARAN DAS, S/O. LT. AMBIKA CHARAN DAS, R/O. 59, ZOO- NARENGI ROAD, GEETANAGAR, GHY.-781021, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS REP. BY THE COMM. and SPECIAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PWRD, DISPUR, GHY.-781006. 2:THE PROJECT DIRECTOR WORLD BANK AIDED PROJECTS PUBLI WORKS ROADS DEPTT. ASSAM ULUBARI GHY.-781007. 3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPTT. ARIASP CIRCLE CHANDMARI GHY.-781003 ASSAM. Page No.# 2/4 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD DHEMAJI STATE ROAD DIVN. DHEMAJI-787057 ASSAM. 5:THE TEAM LEADER URS SCOTT WILSON INDIA PVT. LTD. DIGHALIPUKHURI GHY-781001 ASSAM. 6:THE RESIDENT ENGINEER URS SCOTT WILSON INDIA PVT. LTD. NAKARI-2 NEAR RAIL GATE NAMGHAR NORTH LAKHIMPUR ASSAM-787001. 7:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FOREST DEPTT. DISPUR GHY.-781006 ASSAM. 8:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR FOREST ASSAM REHABARI GHY.-781008 ASSAM. 9:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER NORTH LAKHIMPUR ASSAM-787001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.A CHETIA, MD.ASLAM,MR.D SENAPATI,MR.P DEKA,MR.G N SAHEWALLA Advocate for the Respondent : , SC, FOREST,SC, PWD (ROADS) Page No.# 3/4 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER 25-03-2025 1. Heard Mr. G. N. Sahewalla, learned Senior counsel assisted by Ms. G. Dugar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing counsel, PWD for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Also heard Mr. R. R. Gogoi, learned Standing counsel, Forest Department for the respondent Nos. 7 to 9. 2. The petitioner was awarded the work of “Improvement and Upgradation of SH-22: Gogamukh-Ghilamara (Package No. ASRP/P151/NCB/SH-22/7)” by the respondent authorities. According to the petitioner, it had executed the work and while executing the work, the petitioner company was required to lay a Granular Sub Base (GSB) over the road, which is comprised of gravel, sand etc. 3. It is the contention of the petitioner company that now PWD authorities are insisting on payment of royalty from the pending bills of the petitioner company and proposing deduction thereof. 4. Accordingly, the present writ petition is filed with a prayer that mandamus be issued directing the respondents not to insist upon the petitioner company to submit the forest royalty clearance certificate for the quantities of gravel supplied in execution of the work in question and to set aside the demand. 5. Mr. Sahewalla, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner referring to the judgment passed in RCN Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Assam and Others reported in 2022 (6) GLT 362 contends that the aforesaid issue has already been determined and it was held, amongst other that in absence of any contract condition, when a contractor is unable to produce a certificate showing the use of forest produce, on which royalty has Page No.# 4/4 been collected, the recovery from the bill against forest royalty, cannot be made. 6. It is also contended by Mr. Sahewalla, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner that in the contract in question, there was no clause as regards payment of forest royalty. Therefore, the judgments rendered in RCN Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (supra) as well as in the State of Assam and others Vs. Muslim Ali (MD.), shall cover in the present case. 7. Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing counsel, PWD submits that this aspect of the matter whether the contract contains any specific clause is to be determined by the employer i.e. PWD, who issued the work order and this matter may be disposed of in terms of Para 19 (i) of the judgment passed in RCN Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (supra). 8. This Court has perused the materials available on record. Heard the learned counsels for the parties. 9. Considering the fact of the present case, this Court is of the opinion that this writ petition shall be covered by the determination made in RCN Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (supra). Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of in terms of para-18 & para-19 of the RCN Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (supra) wherein conclusion was made and direction was issued. JUDGE Comparing Assistant