Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010180962020 2025:GAU-AS:2729 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5408/2020 PRADIP KUMAR AGARWALLA S/O LT. SURAJMAL AGARWALLA, R/O USHAGALI, A.T. ROAD, BHARALUMUKH, GUWAHATI-9, DIST-KAMRUP(M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT (GENERAL) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3 4:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER NAGAON W.R. CIRCLE NAGAON 5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER TEZPUR W.R. DIVISION TEZPUR 6:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER SONITPUR ASSAM PIN-782123 Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. K DEVI, MR. P TALUKDAR,MR. D K JAIN,MS D ANGANA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, WATER RESOURCE, MS. S. BARUAH, GA, ASSAM,MR M CHETIA (R-6),SC, REVENUE BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY O R D E R 17.03.2025 1. Heard Mr. P Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S Baruah, learned State counsel and Ms. G Hazarika, learned standing counsel for the Revenue Department. 2. The present writ petition is filed claiming an amount of Rs. 14,41,659/- against the work “Immediate measures for restoration of damages at Lalpukhuri and its adjoining areas by the river Buroi under SDRF for the year 2017-18” executed by the petitioner under the Executive Engineer, Tezpur Water Resource Devision, Tezpur, Assam. 3. The Revenue and Disaster Management Department has filed an affidavit taking a stand that they will require further examination to verify the claim made by the petitioner. It is also a stand that the Department has requested the District Commissioner of Sonitpur to submit relevant documents against the work. 4. Yet another affidavit has been filed by the Water Resource Department through the Assistant Chief Engineer. In the affidavit, they have taken a stand that the work order was issued to the petitioner and same was executed under State Disaster Response Fund Scheme, where the payment to the contractors against execution of work are directly released by the District Commissioner and the Water Resource Department is only the executing authority. They had also taken a stand that the DDMA has already granted an ex-post facto approval for the said scheme amounting to Rs. 14,40,580/- in its meeting held on 15.02.2020. Page No.# 3/3 5. It is contended that for the purpose of payment of such amount, the District Disaster Management Authority is required to grant an ex-post facto approval and such payment can be sanctioned by the Revenue and Disaster Management Department only after having an ex-post facto approval. It is the contention that the Deputy Commissioner can be granted approval for such work from the Disaster Management Authority with justification. 6. By the communication dated 03.02.2020, the Executive Engineer, Tezpur Water Resource Division has requested the DDMA to recommend the additional amount for execution of the additional works in DDMA i.e. ex-post facto approval. 7. Thus, from the affidavit, it is clear that the petitioner had executed the work and the Deputy Commissioner has also granted ex-post facto approval in its meeting held on 15.02.2020. 8. It is an admitted position that that the work was executed as an immediate measures for restoration of damages at Lalpukhuri and its adjoining areas by the river Buroi and was executed under the Supervision of Executive Engineer, Tezpur Water Resource Devision, Tezpur, Assam. 9. In the aforesaid backdrop and also taking note of the stand before this court in the affidavits, instead of keeping this writ petition pending, same is disposed of directing the respondent authorities i.e. DDMA, Sonitpur (Deputy Commissioner, Sonitpur), the respondent in Water Resource Department and the Revenue & Disaster Management Department including the State Executive Committee, State Disaster Management Authority to complete the process as regards the claim of the petitioner within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled for such payment, the payment be made within a period of four weeks thereafter. JUDGE Comparing Assistant