Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010153822026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3945/2026 ASHUTOSH CHAKRABARTY S/O LATE DHIRENDRA CHAKRABARTY, R/O VILL- SELAIMARI, P.O. AND P.S KHOIRABARI, DIST- UDALGURI, ASSAM, PIN- 784522 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PANJABARI, GUWAHATI- 781037 2:THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY BODOFA NWGWR KOKRAJHAR (BTR) PIN- 783370 3:THE SECRETARY PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BTC KOKRAJHAR PIN- 783370 4:BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER BHERAGAON DEVELOPMENT BLOCK BHERGAON UDALGURI ASSAM PIN- 784510 5:JUNIOR ENGINEER BHERAGAON DEVELOPMENT BLOCK Page No.# 2/3 BHERGAON UDALGURI ASSAM PIN- 78451 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B M DEKA, MR. MASUM ALAM,MS. D BORA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P AND R.D., SC, BTC BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 31.07.2026 Heard Shri B.M. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri S.R. Baruah, learned State Counsel; Shri S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, Panchayat & Rural Development Department and Ms. B. Bora, learned Standing Counsel, BTC. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court for a direction for release of contractual dues. It is contended that the petitioner was entrusted 3 nos. of works for constructions of Mahila Community Centre at Nonaikhuti, Cultural Stage at Nonaipara Tea Estate and Brick Boundary Wall at Nonaipara Tea Garden Community Hall in the district of Udalguri, which the petitioner claims to have been done and bills were accordingly raised. However, the bills have not been cleared and the writ petition has been filed. 3. When the matter was taken up on the last occasion i.e. 29.07.2026, this Court had recorded the submission of the learned Standing Counsel, BTC as well as the learned Standing Counsel, P & RD that the petitioner did not meet the requirement as laid down by the Hon’ble Full Bench in the case of Tamsher Ali Vs. State of Assam reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1. It is further contended that the claims was barred by time. Further, a specific plea was taken that in Page 45 Page No.# 3/3 of the writ petition, there is an acknowledgment of receipt of full and final amount. 4. Under those facts and circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner was granted time to obtain instructions. 5. Shri Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that no concrete instructions would be obtained. However, with regard to the receipt of full and final dues, he has submitted that such signatures have been obtained fraudulently. 6. Upon consideration of the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that apart from the claim being period of 2016-17, there is no acknowledgment of the liability in writing by the Head of the Department / Chief Engineer which, amongst others, is an essential requirement laid down by the Hon’ble Full Bench in the aforesaid case of Tamsher Ali (supra). The acknowledgement of receipt of the full and final payment which bears the signature of the petitioner on revenue stamp would also be a relevant factor for not entering into the issue sought to be raised by the petitioner as this Court cannot adjudicate disputed questions of fact. 7. Under those facts and circumstances, the instant writ petition is dismissed. However, there would be no bar for the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of his grievances, if permitted by law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant