Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28059 (GAU)

HEMANTA SAHARIA v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

WP(C)/3788/2023 · 2025-10-26

Devashis Baruah

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010142142023 2025:GAU-AS:14254 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3788/2023 HEMANTA SAHARIA S/O- LATE MANIK SAHARIA, R/O- HAZARIKA PARA, P.O.- HAZARIKA PARA, P.S.- SIPAJHAR, MANGALDOI, DIST.- DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN- 784145. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6, ASSAM. 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3 ASSAM. 3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER SOUTHERN ASSAM CIRCLE WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3 ASSAM. 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MANGALDOI WATER RESOURCES DIVISION MANGALDOI ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 For the Petitioner(s) : None appears For the Respondent(s) : Ms. R. Deka, Standing Counsel BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 27.10.2025 None appears on behalf of the petitioner on call. 2. Ms. R. Deka, the learned Standing Counsel, Water Resources Department appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that it is difficult to file an affidavit taking into account that the petitioner claims to have made certain supplies in pursuance of a work order dated 15.12.2014 and has approached this Court after almost a decade. 3. It is the opinion of this Court that this is not a fit case for exercise of equitable jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, taking into account that the petitioner has approached this Court after a lapse of almost 9 (nine) years. 4. This Court further takes note of that passing any direction in the instant writ petition thereby directing the respondents herein to make certain verifications and then to pay would not be in the interest of justice. 5. Accordingly, this Court does not find any merit in the instant Page No.# 3/3 proceedings, for which, the instant writ petition stands dismissed. 6. Before parting with the record, this Court, however, observes that the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the competent Civil Court, if otherwise permissible under law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant