Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7630 (GAU)

M/S D.H. CONSTRUCTION AND ANR v. THE SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT AND 4 ORS.

WP(C)/921/2025 · 2025-02-20

Soumitra Saikia

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010032292025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/921/2025 M/S D.H. CONSTRUCTION AND ANR VILL.- SADILAPUR, JALUKBARI, GUWAHATI-781012, KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM 2: SIDDIQUR RAHMAN S/O-LATE ABDUR RAHMAN VILL-HATIMURIA P.O AND P.S-MOIRABARI DIST-MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782126 VERSUS THE SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT AND 4 ORS. GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06. 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHTI-03. 3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER NAGAON CIRCLE (IRRIGATION) NAGAON ASSAM 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MORIGAON-LAHARIGHAT-JAGIROAD DIVISION IRRIGAION JAGIROAD. 5:THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER LAHARIGHAT SUB-DIVISION (IRRIGATION) MORIGAON ASSA Page No.# 2/4 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M R ADHIKARI, MOTIUR RAHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : SC, IRRIGATION, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 21.02.2025 Heard Mr. MR Adhikari, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. N. Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel, Irrigation Department. 2. The petitioner no.2 is the proprietor of the petitioner no.1 firm, namely, M/s D.H. Construction. The case of the petitioner no.2 is that the petitioners were allotted with the work for construction of “(a) D1 Canal from Ch.737 m to Ch.902 m =4 cusec and (b) D2m1 from Ch. 0.0 m to Ch.600 m of Titatola PC, under Morigaon Division (Irrigation) renamed as Morigaon-Laharighat-Jagiroad Division(Irrigation), Jagiroad, Morigaon”. The petitioners were allotted contract with regard to the work order No. MDI/CS/102/10-11/TB/66 dated 28.02.2011 by the respondent no.4. The petitioners proceeded with the work and subsequently, successfully executed the work. Learned counsel for the petitioners refers to the completion certificate (Annexure-3 of the writ petition) issued by the Department and counter signed by the Superintending Engineer, Nagaon Circle (Irrigation), Nagaon as well as the respondents no.4 & 5 wherein Page No.# 3/4 the work as mentioned has been shown to be completed. 3. The verification certificate was also issued under the Authority of Superintending Engineer, Nagaon Circle (Irrigation), Nagaon which indicates 100% completion of work. Thereafter, the bills which were submitted by the petitioner remained unpaid. The total amount claimed by the petitioner no.2 is Rs.9,88,096/- (Rupees Nine Lakh Eighty Eight Thousand Ninety Six only) which is still pending. It is the grievance of the petitioner no.2 that in spite of the assurances given by the Authorities, the outstanding amount has not been cleared. The petitioners, therefore, have approached this court seeking order for release of the bills pending. 4. Mr. N. Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel, Irrigation Department submits that the instructions are necessary in this matter. 5. Upon perusal of the records, it is seen that the work which was allotted to the petitioners has been duly completed and the certificate of completion of the work was issued by the Department. 6. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the matter can be closed and disposed of at the motion stage itself without issuing any notice to the respondents. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of directing the respondents, more particularly, the respondent no.2 to examine and verify the claims of the Page No.# 4/4 petitioner no.2. If the amount, after due verification, is found to be payable to the petitioner no.2, then the same should be released by following the guidelines laid down in Tamsher Ali Vs. State of Assam and Ors, reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1. 8. In terms of the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. 9. The entire exercise of verification of the admitted amount should be completed by the concerned respondents within a period of 3 (three) months, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. JUDGE Comparing Assistant