Page No.# 1/8 GAHC010044142025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1316/2025 M/S 3479 N. N. SINGH SECURITY AGENCY REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, COL. N. N. SINGH (RETIRED), HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT H/NO. 54, WARD NO. 31, UDAYAN PATH, PRANTIK PATH BY-LANE, DWARAKA NAGAR, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781022. ADDRESS- A-5, AMERIGOG HEIGHTS, 9TH MILE, KHANAPARA, NEAR CRPF CAMP, GATE NO. 2, ASSAM-781037. VERSUS THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR, 16-20, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001. 2:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (SECURITY) FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA FCI HEADQUARTERS 16-20 BARAKHAMBA ROAD NEW DELHI-110001. 3:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ZONE) FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ZONAL OFFICE NORTH-EAST ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007. 4:THE GENERAL MANAGER (REGION) FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA REGIONAL OFFICE ASSAM REGION G.S. ROAD Page No.# 2/8 PALTAN BAZAR- 781008. 5:THE AREA MANAGER FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA FCI DO JORHAT CHANDRA BHAWAN NEHRU PARK JORHAT-781001. 6:THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA DIVISION OFFICE JORHAT FCI DO JORHAT CHANDRA BHAWAN NEHRU PARK JORHAT-781001. 7:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL RESETTLEMENT GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF DEFENCE DEPTT. OF EX-SERVICEMEN WELFARE DIRECTORATE GENERAL RESETTLEMENT WEST BLOCK-IV R. K. PURAM NEW DELHI-110066. 8:THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL DIRECTORATE RESETTLEMENT ZONE (EAST) DRZ(E) MINISTRY OF DEFENSE C/O HQ BENGAL SUB AREA 246 AJC BOSE ROAD ALIPORE POST KOLKATA-700027 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R TAHBILDAR, Advocate for the Respondent : SC, F C I, MRS. R DEVI (C.G.C.),DY.S.G.I. Page No.# 3/8 Linked Case : WP(C)/289/2025 M/S 3479 N N SINGH SECURITY AGENCY REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR COLONEL N. N. SINGH (RETIRED) HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT HOUSE NO. 54 WARD NO. 31 UDAYAN PATH PRANTIK PATH BY LANE DWARKA NAGAR DISPUR GUWAHATI-781022. SECOND ADD.- A-5 AMERIGOG HEIGHTS 9TH MILE KHANAPARA NEAR CRPF CAMP GATE NO. 2 ASSAM-781037 VERSUS THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR 16-20 BARAKHAMBA ROAD NEW DELHI-110001 2:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (SECURITY) FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA FCI HEADQUARTERS 16-20 BARAKHAMBA ROAD NEW DELHI-110001 3:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ZONE) FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ZONAL OFFICE NORTH-EAST ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007 4:THE GENERAL MANAGAER (REGION) FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA REGIONAL OFFICE ASSAM REGION G.S. ROAD PALTAN BAZAR-781008 Page No.# 4/8 5:THE AREA MANAGER FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA DISTRICT OFFICER-GUWAHATI GUWAHATI-781007 6:THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA DIVISION OFFICE GUWAHATI MITRA BUILDING ASHRAM ROAD ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007 7:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL RESETTLEMENT GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF DEFENSE DEPARTMENT OF EX-SERVICEMEN WELFARE DIRECTORATE GENERAL RESETTLEMENT WEST BLOCK-IV R.K. PURAM NEW DELHI-110066 8:ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL DIRECTORATE RESETTLEMENT ZONE (EAST) (DRZ(E)) MINISTRY OF DEFENSE C/O HQ BENGAL SUB AREA 246 AJC BOSE ROAD ALIPORE POST KOLKATA-700027 ------------ Advocate for : MR. A R TAHBILDAR Advocate for : SC F C I appearing for THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS Linked Case : WP(C)/6549/2024 M/S 3479/ N N SINGH SECURITY AGENCY REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR COLONEL N. N. SINGH (RETIRED) HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT HOUSE NO. 54 WARD NO. 31 UDAYAN PATH PRANTIK PATH BY LANE Page No.# 5/8 DWARAKA NAGAR DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781022 ADDRESS-2- A-5 AMERIGOG HEIGHTS 9TH MILE KHANAPARA NEAR CRPF CAMP GATE NO.2 ASSAM- 781037 VERSUS THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR 16-20 BARAKHAMBA ROAD NEW DELHI- 110001 2:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (SECURITY) FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA FCI HEADQUARTERS 16-20 BARAKHAMBA LANE NEW DELHI- 110001 3:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ZONE) FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ZONAL OFFICE NORTH-EAST ULUBARI GUWAHATI- 781007 4:THE GENERAL MANAGER (REGION) FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA REGIONAL OFFICE ASSAM REGION G.S. ROAD PALTAN BAZAR- 781008 5:THE AREA MANAGER FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA DISTRICT OFFICE- NORTH LAKHIMPUR LAKHIMPUR- 787001 6:THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA Page No.# 6/8 DIVISION OFFICE NORTH LAKHIMPUR K.B. ROAD LAKHIMPUR- 787001 7:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL RESETTLEMENT GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF DEFENSE DEPARTMENT OF EX-SERVICEMEN WELFARE DIRECTORATE GENERAL RESETTLEMENT WEST BLOCK-IV R.K.PURAM NEW DELHI- 110066 8:ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL DIRECTORATE RESETTLEMENT ZONE (EAST) (DRZ(E)) MINISTRY OF DEFENSE C/O HQ BENGAL SUB AREA 246 AJC BOSE ROAD ALIPORE POST KOLKATA- 700027 ------------ Advocate for : MR. S BANIK Advocate for : SC F C I appearing for THE FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 20.08.2026 Heard Shri S. Banik, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners assisted by Shri AR Tahbildar, learned counsel in these cases. Also heard Shri PK Roy, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri B. Das, learned counsel for the FCI and Ms. R. Devi as well as Shri PS Bhattacharyya, learned CGC. 2. At the outset, Shri Roy, learned Senior Counsel for the FCI has submitted that in the meantime, 2 writ petitions on the same subject matter has been disposed of. In one case, WP(C)/5842/2021, an order has been passed on 26.02.2026 whereby the writ petition was dismissed giving the liberty to Page No.# 7/8 approach a competent Civil Court. Such observation was made on the ground that the issue involve disputed questions of fact. So far as the second writ petition WP(C)/4014/2017 is concerned, the same was dismissed on withdrawal vide order dated 17.11.2023. 3. Shri Banik, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, on the other hand, has submitted that the facts perhaps were not projected in the proper manner in the aforesaid two cases. He has drawn the attention of this Court to a communication dated 07.12.2022 wherein the Director General had raised the issue to the Chairman & Managing Director, which is yet to be addressed. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the provisions of the contract under Clause XIII(b), as per which the contractor would be authorized to engage adequate staff to the satisfaction of the Area Manager. He has also submitted that the contract also provides for payment of reliving charge. The attention of this Court has also been drawn to Clause 13 of Annexure-A, as per which for staff engaged by the contractor, an identity card would be provided which would be countersigned by the FCI authorities. He submits that such an act would manifest the endorsement of the authorities for such engagement. 4. On the other hand, the learned Senior Counsel for the FCI has submitted that the impugned order clearly shows that engaged staff are more than the agreed numbers. He has clarified that so far as WP(C)/1316/2025 is concerned, the agreed numbers of staff was 26 whereas it is claimed that the engaged numbers were 31; in WP(C)/6549/2024 the agreed numbers of staff was 28 whereas it is claimed that the engaged numbers were 32 and in WP(C)/289/2025 the agreed numbers of staff was 52 whereas it is claimed that the engaged numbers were 59. He accordingly submits that the present claim is without any basis and the impugned order is justified. Page No.# 8/8 5. Shri Banik, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has immediately responded that even if it is assumed for the sake of argument that the engagement of the number of staff over and above the agreed number is not justified, as per the understanding of the respondents, there cannot be any dispute in the matter of release of the amount to the agreed number of staff. He accordingly submits that appropriate direction be issued in this regard and also a liberty to the petitioners to raise the matter before the appropriate Civil Court for the numbers of staff which were beyond the numbers agreed upon. 6. Shri Roy, learned Senior Counsel for the FCI has submitted that it has to be established that extra numbers of staff were actually engaged by the contractor. 7. In view of the facts and circumstances, this writ petitions stand disposed of by directing that the respondent authorities shall not withhold the amount pertaining to the agreed number of staff and the same be released to the petitioners expeditiously and preferably within a period of 45 days from today. For the remaining number of staff, if engaged, the petitioners would have the liberty to approach the appropriate Civil Court. The petitioners would also require to establish that engagements of the additional staff were actually done. It is needless to state that if such an approach is made, the learned Civil Court proceed with the matter strictly in accordance with law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant