Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010202232025 2025:GAU-AS:12822 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5465/2025 LALCHAND SINGH S/O BIDESHI SINGH, R/O KHERONI, P.O. AND P.S.- KHERONI, DIST- HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN-782448 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TOTHE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DDEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM B.K. KAKATY ROAD ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007 4:THE ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (A) ASSAM B.K. KAKATY ROAD ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007 5:THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE -CUM- DISTRICT COMMISSIONER WEST KARBI ANGLONG HAMREN DIST- WEST KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 PIN-782486 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE WEST KARBI ANGLONG HAMREN DIST- WEST KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM PIN-782486 7:THE MOTOR TRANSPORT OFFICER POLICE RESERVE HAMREN DIST- WEST KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM PIN-78248 For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. K. Singh, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. R. Baruah, Government Advocate : Mr. B. Gogoi, Addl. AG, Assam BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 17.09.2025 Heard Mr. S. K. Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. S. R. Baruah, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of all the Respondents except Respondent No.2. Mr. B. Gogoi, the learned Additional Advocate General, Assam appears on behalf of the Respondent No.2. 2. The Petitioner herein has approached this Court seeking writ in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the Respondent Authorities to pay an amount of Rs.3,68,857/- which the Petitioner claims that the said amount is due by the Respondent Authorities and have been duly acknowledged. Page No.# 3/3 3. This Court finds it very pertinent to mention that the Petitioner claims that the said amount of Rs.3,68,857/- is due for the hiring of his vehicle bearing Registration No.AS-02-6575 for the period from 01.03.2019 to 03.09.2019. 4. This Court enquired with the learned counsel for the Petitioner as to whether there is any acknowledgement to show that the amount so claimed by the Petitioner has been acknowledged by the Respondent Authorities. The learned counsel for the Petitioner could not show any such document in that regard. 5. This Court further takes note of that filing of a belated claim as in the instant case after 6 years causes great inconvenience to the Respondents as they may not have records to verify resulting in depriving the Respondent Authorities of a valid defence. 6. Considering the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition for which the instant writ petition stands dismissed. 7. Liberty however is given to the Petitioner to approach the Respondent Authorities, if so advised. JUDGE Comparing Assistant