Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010182852022 2025:GAU-AS:13814 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5953/2022 HEMANTA BORAH S/O- SRI AJIT BORAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- NAKATANI, P.O.- NAKATANI, P.S.- SIVASAGAR, DISTRICT- SIVASAGAR (ASSAM), PIN- 785667. VERSUS THE CHIEF ELECTROAL OFFICER, ASSAM AND 3 ORS. DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SIVASAGAR TEMPLE ROAD P.O. AND DIST.- SIVASAGAR PIN- 785640. 3:THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM I/C REFRESHMENT CELL PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION 2019 SIVASAGAR OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SIVASAGAR TEMPLE ROAD SIVASAGAR PIN- 785640. 4:THE ELECTION OFFICER SIVASAGAR Page No.# 2/4 OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SIVASAGAR TEMPLE ROAD SIVASAGAR PIN- 785640 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Advocates for the petitioner(s) :Mr. A Rahman Advocates for the respondent(s) : Mr. G Bokolial Govt. Advocate, Assam Date of hearing & judgment :15.10.2025 JUDGMENT & ORDER(ORAL) Heard Mr. A Rahman, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. G Bokolial, the learned Government Advocate, Assam appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4. None appears on behalf of the Chief Electoral Officer, Assam, when the matter is called upon. 2. The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the non-payment of an amount of Rs.1,80,055/- which the petitioner claims to be entitled on account of supplying of food items during the parliamentary elections of 2019. Page No.# 3/4 3. The record reveals that an affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on 17.11.2022 by the respondent No.2, wherein it has been mentioned at paragraph No.5 that during the parliamentary elections of 2019, the petitioner had submitted a bill of Rs.7,40,943/- and the said amount have been duly paid to the petitioner. Further to that, it has been mentioned that during verification of the outstanding liability of the said election, the petitioner submitted a further bill of Rs.2,98,719/- which was checked by the then Additional Deputy Commissioner, Sivasagar. However, upon checking such bills, the writ petitioner was requested to submit the supply order and copies of the challan which are required for payment, but the writ petitioner could not submit any document in support of the said claim. 4. This Court further takes note of that pursuant to the filing of the said affidavit-in-opposition, no reply has also been filed controverting the allegations mentioned in paragraph No.5 of the affidavit-in- opposition. Considering the above, this Court is not in a position to direct payment of an amount of Rs.1,80,055/- as has been sought for by way of the present writ petition. 5. Accordingly the instant writ petition, therefore, stands dismissed. 6. Be that as it may, the petitioner herein is given the liberty to approach the Court of competent jurisdiction, if so aggrieved, and the Page No.# 4/4 period from 06.09.2022 till date be excluded while computing the period of limitation. JUDGE Comparing Assistant