Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010238722025 2025:GAU-AS:16635 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/603/2025 MTCEC NGO AND ANR A NON GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT/ SECRETARY, MD. ABDUL RAHMAN 2: MD ABDUL RAHMAN SON OF LATE SAYED ALI RESIDENT OF VILL.- BAMUNGAON P.O.- PUTHIMARI PIN-781381 DIST.- KAMRUP (R) ASSA VERSUS DR MILANJIT BHATTACHARYYA AND 4 ORS. THE COMMISSIONER SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CUM THE MISSION DIRECTOR, SBM(G), DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006, ASSAM. 2:SANJIB RAJKHOWA THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT HENGRABARI GUWAHATI-781036 ASSAM 3:DEBA KUMAR MISHRA THE CHAIRMAN KDWSC CUM DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP (R) AMINGAON PIN-781031 ASSAM. Page No.# 2/3 4:KHANINDRA SARMA THE MEMBER SECRETARY KDWSC CUM EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-781003 KAMRUP(M) ASSAM 5:MUKUT BARMAN THE ASSOCIATE MEMBER SECRETARY KDWSC CUM EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT RANGIA DIVISION PIN-781354 KAMRUP(R) ASSA For the petitioner (s) : Mr. A. Gohain, Advocate For the respondent (s) : XXXX BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH O R D E R 03.12.2025 The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that pursuant to the filing of the instant contempt application, the petitioner No.2 who is the representative of the petitioner No.1 has come to learn that the respondents in the WP(C) No.1811/2022 have verified the entitlement of the petitioners to be Rs.12,60,000/- and in that regard, the Superintending Engineer, PWD on 26.11.2025 has submitted a demand to the Page No.# 3/3 Additional Chief Engineer, PWD. The said communication has been placed before this Court, which is kept on record and marked with the letter “X”. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that taking into account that such development, the petitioners would not like to pursue the present contempt application. However, in the circumstance the said amount has not been paid within a particular span of time, the petitioners may be permitted to again approach this Court. 3. Taking into account the above aspects as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the document which is kept on record and marked with the letter “X”, the instant contempt application stands closed. 4. However, liberty is given to the petitioners to again approach in the circumstance the petitioners are not paid the dues to which they are entitled to. JUDGE Comparing Assistant