Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010179582024 2025:GAU-AS:9401-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WA/309/2024 1: M/S PHEROS STRUCTURRAL PVT AND ANR. REGISTERED OFFICE AT INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, BAMUNIMAIDAM, GUWAHATI -781021, ASSAM, REPRESENTED. BY SHRI VIVEK SINGH, THE MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2: SRI VIVEK SINGH S/O- LATE BHUWAN PATI SINGH RESIDENT OF 5A HEMLOTA HERITAGE AMBARI NEXT TO AGP OFFICE GUWAHATI-781001 IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP (METRO) ASSAM VERSUS 1: THE ASSAM INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND 2 ORS. GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM UNDERTAKING INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, BAMUNIMAIDAM, GUWAHATI-781021, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR THE ASSAM INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONGOVT GOVT. OF ASSAM UNDERTAKING INDUSTRIAL ESTATE BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI-781021 3:THE GENERAL MANAGER THE ASSAM INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION GOVT. OF ASSAM UNDERTAKING INDUSTRIAL ESTATE BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI-781021 For the Appellant(s) : Mr. S. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. A.N. Sarmah, Advocate for respondent Nos.1, 2 & 3. Page No.# 2/3 – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA 23.07.2025 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ) By the impugned order dated 05.08.2024 passed in WP(C) No.1973/2017, a learned Single Judge directed the authorities of the Assam Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation (AIIDC) to issue notice to the appellant herein, calling upon him to clear the dues receivable from him. The notice was supposed to include the quantified amount receivable from the appellant till the date of issuance of such notice. By the same order, a direction was issued that the appellant thereafter would clear the dues as quantified by the authorities promptly within a period of 1(one) month. The learned Single Judge further directed that in the event of the appellant failing to clear his dues within the time-frame prescribed, the authorities of the AIIDC would be at liberty to take steps for his eviction from the industrial unit occupied by him, and for recovery of the amounts due from him through a lawful process. The contention on behalf of the appellant today is that whatever was quantified till 2017 has been paid by way of rental of the premises which he has been occupying in the industrial unit. Thereafter, regular rental is being paid. Such a statement is not supported by any receipt or document evincing that the payments are being made. Nonetheless, we only modify the order of the learned Single Judge to the extent that the quantified amount under the notice must be paid by the appellant within a period of 1(one) month, to be counted from today, failing which the directions given by the learned Single Judge would remain operative. Page No.# 3/3 Since a dispute has been raised by the appellant about the quantified amount by the authorities of AIIDC, the payments made by the appellant shall be under protest, reserving his rights and liabilities. With the afore-noted modification in the order impugned, the appeal stands disposed of. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant