Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010089902024 2026:GAU-AS:11731 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2417/2024 NABAJYOTI BARUAH S/O- LATE JATINDRA NATH BEZBARUAH, R/O H.NO-41, SENDURI ALI, NABIN NAGAR, ZOO ROAD, P.S- GITANAGAR, DIST- KAMRUP (M), GUWAHATI-24, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PWD (ROADS) DEPARTMENT , DISPUR, GUWAHATI -6 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PWD (ROADS) GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI -3 3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER BORDER ROADS ORGANIZATION ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-03 4:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PWD (ROADS) GUWAHATI ROAD CIRCLE FANCY BAZAR GUWAHATI-01 Page No.# 2/6 DIST-KAMRUP (M) ASSAM 5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DEPARTMENT (PWRD) SOUTH KAMRUP TERRITORIAL ROAD DIVN. MIRZA PALASHBARI-781125 6:THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DEPARTMENT (PWRD) SOUTH KAMRUP TERRITORIAL ROAD DIVN. MIRZA PALASHBARI-781125 7:THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DEPARTMENT (PWRD) SOUTH KAMRUP TERRITORIAL ROAD DIVN. MIRZA PALASHBARI-781125 8:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-0 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. B. D. Goswami, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Gogoi, Addl. AG, Assam · Date on which Judgment was reserved : N/A · Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 17.08.2026 · Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative Part of the Judgment : Yes · Whether the full Judgment has been Pronounced : N/A Page No.# 3/6 JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Heard Mr. B. D. Goswami, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. B. Gogoi, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the PWD. 2. The Petitioner has filed the instant writ petition seeking appropriate directions upon the Respondent Authorities for payment of an amount of Rs.60,96,496/- along with interest @10% per annum. 3. Pursuant to the filing of the writ petition, notice was issued by this Court on 13.05.2024. 4. An affidavit-in-opposition was filed by the Respondent No.2 wherein it is mentioned that the running bill of the work was prepared as per the quantity of item of work executed at the site and up to date payment made to the Petitioner to the tune of Rs.89,32,823/- against his bill value of Rs.1,36,64,697/-. 5. It is further seen that an affidavit-in-reply was filed by the Petitioner wherein at Paragraph No.8, the said statement of payment of Rs.89,32,823/- have not been denied. 6. This Court also takes note of the additional affidavit filed by the Respondent No.2 on 06.08.2026 wherein it is mentioned that Page No.# 4/6 the total bill of Rs.1,36,64,697/- was paid to the Petitioner partially time to time after receipt of the FOC after deducting the necessary deductions. A Completion Certificate has also been enclosed as Annexure-A to the additional affidavit stating inter alia that the Petitioner has been paid the total amount of Rs.1,36,64,697/-. 7. Mr. B. D. Goswami, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that though he tried to obtain instructions from the Petitioner as regards the payment so made, but such reconciliation could not be carried out on account of non- availability of the payment vouchers. 8. Taking into account the above, it is the opinion of this Court that the present writ petition can be closed in view of the stand so taken by the Respondent Authorities more particularly in the additional affidavit filed by the Respondent No.2 on 06.08.2026 by passing appropriate directions. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition therefore stands disposed of with the following observations and directions: (i) Taking into account the stand which have been taken by the Respondent PWD by filing the additional affidavit that the total amount of Rs.1,36,64,697/- have been paid to the Petitioner after carrying out Page No.# 5/6 necessary deductions, this Court cannot pass a direction upon the Respondents to make further payment to the Petitioner in the present facts of the case. (ii) Taking into account the Petitioner’s grievances that he had not been able to reconcile his accounts on account of the non-availablity of the payment vouchers, this Court directs the Respondent No.2 upon production of a certified copy of the instant judgment to provide the Petitioner the payment vouchers/details which would show the disbursements of the total amounts as mentioned by the Respondent No.2 in the additional affidavit. (iii) The said exercise be carried out within a period of 30 (thirty) days from the date of submission of the certified copy of the instant judgment to the Respondent No.2. 10. Before parting with the records, it is observed that if the payment vouchers/details upon due reconciliation show that the payment was not made to the Petitioner as averred in the additional affidavit filed by the Respondent No.2, it shall be construed that a misleading/false affidavit was filed by the Page No.# 6/6 Respondent No.2 before this Court, for which appropriate steps can be taken by the Petitioner before this Court as permissible under law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant Bijoy Saha Digitally signed by Bijoy Saha Date: 2026.08.24 16:54:22 +05'30'