Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010198872025 2025:GAU-AS:12118 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5233/2025 MD JIYAUR PASA S/O LT SALIM PASA NALBARI TOWN WARD NO. 8 PS AND PO NALBARI DIST NALBARI ASSAM 781335 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPTT ROADS CHANDMARI GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN 781003 3:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWRD NALBARI DIST TERRITORIAL ROAD DIVISION NALBARI ASSAM 78133 Advocate for the Petitioner : MD S HOQUE, MR. M DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, PWD ROAD Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 05.09.2025 Heard Mr. S. Hoque, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities, particularly the Executive Engineer, PWRD, Nalbari District, Territorial Road Division, Nalbari, to issue/countersign the Site Visit Certificate with Verification against the Package Nos. MAINT/SOPDG/2025- 26/142 and MAINT/SOPDG/2025-26/143 in terms of the NIT dated 13.08.2025, on the ground that despite the request made by the petitioner and having been visited the site pursuant to the above tender, no certificate has been issued or countersigned by the Executive Engineer. 3. Considering the limited prayer of the petitioner, Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, was directed to obtain instruction at the motion stage today. Accordingly, Mr. B. Gogoi, on instruction, submits that the petitioner was requested to submit the documentary evidence of visiting the site of the works so that further necessary action can be initiated as per Clause 7 of SBD of the NIT dated 13.08.2025, which has been duly received by the petitioner. However, the petitioner has failed to respond. 4. On perusal of the averments made in the writ petition, it is noticed that the petitioner has not made any averments with regard to the letter/communication dated 26.08.2025 for furnishing of documentary evidence Page No.# 3/3 of visiting the site. 5. Faced with such a situation, Mr. Hoque, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that he may be allowed to withdraw this writ petition with a liberty to approach the Executive Engineer by submitting the documentary evidence of site visits in terms of the requirements of SBD of the NIT as well as the letter dated 26.08.2025. 6. This Court is inclined to impose cost on the petitioner; however, taking a lenient view of the matter considering the prayer is confined to issuance of the Site Visit Certificate with countersign, prayer for withdrawal of the writ petition is allowed with a liberty to approach the appropriate authority for countersign or issuance of Site Visit Certificate against the Package Nos. MAINT/SOPDG/2025- 26/142 and MAINT/SOPDG/ 2025-26/143 in terms of the NIT dated 13.08.2025, if the petitioner has in fact visited the site. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of on withdrawal. The copy of the letter/communication dated 26.08.2025 is kept on record. JUDGE Comparing Assistant