Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010292082023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/171/2024 JASHMAT ALI AHMED S/O- HATEM ALI, VILLAGE- MOUKHOWA CHAR, P.O.- UZIRAR CHAR, P.S. ALOPUTI, DISTRICT- BARPETA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS (ROADS) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS (ROADS) DEPARTMENT CHANDMARI GUWAHATI- 781003 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF BARPETA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS (ROADS) DEPARTMENT BARPETA BAGHBAR AND CHENGA TERRITORIAL ROAD DIVISION DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM 5:GANESH CHANDRA KARMAKAR S/O- MOTI KARMAKAR VILL AND P.O. MANDIA P.S. MANDIA DIST.- BARPETA ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A T SARKAR, MR S HUSSAIN Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PWD, MR. M DEKA (r-5),MD S HOQUE (r-5),GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 02.05 .2025 Heard Mr. A.T. Sarkar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Nayak, learned Standing Counsel, Public Works Department, Assam. Also heard Mr. J. Handique, learned Junior Govt. Advocate for the State respondents and Mr. S. Haque, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5. Mr. A. T. Sarkar, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that this writ petition may not be maintainable and he would like to withdraw the same. Mr. Nayak, learned Standing Counsel, PWD referring to the instruction, has submitted that on receipt of the complaint regarding construction of road, an enquiry was conducted and accordingly found that the road in question namely Periodic Renewal of Uzirar Char to Mowkhowa Road under Mukhya Mantri Path Nabikaran Achani for the year 2022 -23 in the District of Barpeta has been completed as per the specification. To that effect, the local people of Uzirar Char to Mowkhowa Road, has submitted an application that the construction of the works have been carried out by the contractor as per estimated cost of the department and the guidelines of Govt. and also there was no fraud or misappropriation of the Govt. fund by the contractor. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and the grievance raised in this writ petition as well as the instruction placed by the learned Standing Counsel, PWD, Mr. P. Nayak and fairly admitted by Mr. A.T. Sarkar, learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that no issue remains Page No.# 3/3 to be determined in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is closed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant