Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010270162024 2026:GAU-AS:11352 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/703/2024 M/S MANARANJAN BRAHMA ENTERPRISE, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT DOLAIGAON, UJANPARA, BONGAIGAON, ASSAM 783380 REPRESENTED BY ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR SRI MANARANJAN BRAHMA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS. VERSUS AKASH DEEP, IAS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL, KOKRAJHAR, BODOFA NWGWR, BTR, ASSAM 783370 2:SUJIT BAGLARI ACS SECRETARY BTC WPT AND BC DEPT KOKRAJHAR BODOFA NWGWR BTR ASSAM 783370 3:MUKESH CHANDRA SAHU PRINCIPAL SECRETARY BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL (BTC) KOKRAJHAR BODOFA NWGWR BTR ASSAM-783370. 4:ANUP KUMAR BRAHMA SECRETARY WPT AND BC DEPARTMENT Page No.# 2/7 BTC KOKRAJHAR BODOFA NWGWR BTR ASSAM-783370 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J KHATANIAR, MR S NEOGI Advocate for the Respondent : SC, BTC, MR. N K SHARMA BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER Date : 12.08.2026 Heard Mr. N. J. Khatoniar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. N. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, BTC, appearing for the contemnors. 2. By way of this contempt petition, the petitioner has brought to the notice of this court as regards the alleged willful and deliberate violation of the judgment & order dated 02.08.2024 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 3478/2022. Relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid order read as under: - “14. As can be seen from the two additional affidavits filed on behalf of the respondent nos.1 to 6 by the respondent no.1, the respondents are examining the amount payable to the petitioner, for supply of 4.5 lakh Mosquito Nets for distribution under the WPT & BC for the year 2017-2018. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that nothing further needs to be adjudicated at this stage. 15. Accordingly, in view of the stand taken by the State respondents that the claim of the petitioner for payment of outstanding dues is being examined for supply of 4,50,000 Mosquito Nets, which have been distributed to the identified BPL families under the WPT&BC for the year 2017-2018, in terms of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Tamsher Ali (supra), this Court directs that the examination being done by the State respondents should be concluded and payment made for the admitted amount, Page No.# 3/7 within a period of 4 (four) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.” 3. Today when the matter is called, Ms. N. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, BTC, appearing for the contemnors by placing an order dated 11.08.2026 passed by the Bodoland Territorial Council, submits that the claim of the petitioner has already been examined and the admitted amount has already been released to the petitioner. 4. Mr. N. J. Khatoniar, learned counsel, submits that out of the total bill of Rs. 31,50,00,000/- only a sum of Rs. 13,00,00,000/- has been released. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and having perused the material available on record, it appears that this Court while disposing the writ petition, i.e., WP(C) No. 3478/2022 by judgment & order dated 02.08.2024 directed the respondents to examine the claim of the petitioner for payment of outstanding dues for supply of 4.5 lakh mosquito nets which has been distributed to the identified BPL families under the WPT & BC for the year 2017-2018 in terms of the full bench judgment of this Court in Tamsher Ali v. State of Assam & Ors, reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1, and upon such examination being concluded to make payment of the admitted amount thereof within a stipulated period to the petitioner. 6. It appears that upon receipt of the aforesaid direction of this Court the respondent authority examined the claim of the petitioner and found that out of the total claim of the petitioner, the petitioner is only entitled to Rs. 13,00,00,000/-, which has already been received by the petitioner. That apart, upon concluding the preliminary enquiry no further dues are there against the petitioner in respect of the supply order in question. 7. The order dated 11.08.2026 passed by the Bodoland Territorial Council has been placed before this Court and the same is taken on record Page No.# 4/7 and marked as “X”. The aforesaid order read as under: - “No BTC/CD-53/2022-23/180 Dated-Kokrajhar the 11th August, 2026 ORDER WHEREAS the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court vide Order dated 03.08 2026 passed in Contempt Case (Civil) No 703/2024 M/s Manaranjan Brahma Enterprise Vs Akash Deep IAS& Ors has pleased to direct the respondents Nos. 3 & 4 respectively to apprise as to whether the entitlement of the contempt petitioner has been examined in the light of the Order dated 02.08.2024 passed in WP(C) No 3478/2022 M/s Manaranjan Brahma Enterprise Vs The State of Assam & Ors. WHEREAS the instant contempt petitioner herein M/s Manaranjan Brahma Enterprise filed a writ petition being numbered and registered as WP(C) 3478/2022 M/s Manaranjan Brahma Enterprise Vs The State of Assam & Ors before the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court claiming an outstanding liability payment of Rs 18.50.00.000.00 (Rupees Eighteen Crore Fifty Lakh) only out of his total contractual bill of Rs 31 50.00 000 00 (Rupees Thirty One Crore Fifty Lakh) only against supply of mosquito nets in three development blocks under Kokrajhar District viz Dotma Development Block (Quantity supplied to be 1 Lakh) Kokrajhar Development Block (Quantity supplied to be 2 Lakh) and Kachugaon Development Block (Quantity supplied to be 1 Lakh 50 Thousand) during the year 2017 The relevant supply orders issued in this regard by the then Addl Director cum CHD WPT&BC Department, BTC were Memo Nos BTC/AD/CHD(WPT)-07/2017 -2018/68 dated 08 11 2017 BTC/AD/CHD(WPT)-07/2017- 2018/66, dated 08.11 2017 and BTC/AD/CHD(WPT)-07/2017- 2018/67 dated 08.11 2017 respectively. WHEREAS it is relevant to mention herein that the contempt petitioner has already received payment of Rs 13,00,00,000.00 (Rupees Thirteen Crore) Only against this supply orders. WHEREAS a preliminary enquiry was conducted with regard to claims of the contempt petitioners, but the report is found to be not satisfactory The report fails to analyse the market rate of the quality of mosquito net supplied with that of the rate claimed by Page No.# 5/7 the contempt petitioner. WHEREAS it would be relevant to mention herein that no NIT was called for prior to issue of these supply orders, including the rate and quality of this supply item The supply orders were issued to the petitioner purely based on a similar supply order of mosquito net issued to the same petitioner which he supplied in May, 2016. The payment related to mosquito net supplied in May, 2016 was audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India and the Comptroller and Auditor General of india observed under Para 1 39 in the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Social, General and Economic (Non-PSUs) Sectors for the year ended 31 March 2018, Government of Assam (Report No 4 of 2019) as follows. "Rule 21(i) of General Financial Rule, 2005 provides that every officer is expected to exercise the same vigilance in respect of expenditure from public money as a person of ordinary prudence would exercise in respect of expenditure of his own money. As desired by the Hon'ble Chief of BTC, the Council Head of Department, Welfare of Plain tribes and Backward Classes (WPT & BC) proposed (September 2015) to procure mosquito net for distribution to BPL famillies. Based on the proposal, Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) accorded (September 2015) administrative approval for procurement of 3,57 142 mosquito nets (nylon, size 5 ft x 65 ft) for distribution to the beneficiaries within the BTC area under BTC Chief Discretionary Fund to extend assistance to people of BTC CHD, WPT & BC issued supply order (December 2015) to the supplier selected by purchase board for the supply of 3,57,142 mosquito nets at Rs 700 each The supplier supplied (May 2016) the same and was paid Rs 22.69 crore leaving balance unpaid amount of Rs 2 31 crore. Audit observed (August October 2017) that the actual cost of the supplied mosquito net was Rs 137 each at which the supplier procured those from Kolkata based firm. This indicated that the Purchase Board accepted the exorbitantly high rate without assessing the available market rate. Therefore, there was excess cost of 563 per mosquito net involving extra expenditure of Rs 20.11 crore (Rs 563 X 3,57 142) The matter was reported to the Government (July 2018) and discussed in a meeting (November 2018). In response, Page No.# 6/7 Government forwarded a reply in which Secretary, BTC stated that the supply was awarded to the lowest tenderer through competitive bidding and comparison of rate of mosquito net purchased from Kolkata with the tendered rates was not correct as it included transportation cost, statutory dues, profit, risk, place of delivery etc. However, the reply was not tenable due to the following reasons. 1 Though the supply was awarded to the lowest tenderer through competitive bidding, the tendered rate was not compared with the market rates to ensure reasonableness in violation of the financial rule. 2 The rate of Rs 137 each net was inclusive of transportation cost from Kolkata to the district level offices. Thus, the purchase board though accepted lowest offered rate but it was exorbitantly higher than available market rate. This highlighted inefficiency of BTC in maintaining economy in spending public money." The Comptroller and Auditor General of India thus determined the rate of the mosquito net supplied by the contempt petitioner to be Rs 137 per net and not Rs 100 per net as claimed by the petitioner The mosquito nets thus supplied transpire that those were of inferior quality and did not deserve to be rated at Rs 700 per net, but should have been rated at Rs 137 per net. WHEREAS, as per materials on records available to this end, the same person was issued the impugned supply order in 2017 based not on any fresh tender or bidding process but based on the same supply order including quality and rate that was supplied in May, 2016 and thus the supply of mosquito nets during 2017 was identical to the previous supply during May 2016 having same specification and everything else As such observation of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India also equally extends to the supply of mosquito nets by the same party in the year 2017 being item identical in specification and rate. AND THEREFORE, in view of the above rate of each mosquito net to the tune of Rs 137 as already determined is justified against the item supplied by the instant contempt petitioner Also. Rs 13.00.00.000.00 (Rupees Thirteen Crore) only already released to the contempt petitioner covers more than sufficiently against the mosquito nets supplied as claimed by the Page No.# 7/7 petitioner The balance claim of Rs 18.50.00.00000 (Rupees Eighteen Crore Fifty Lakh) only thus being not found feasible to pay and would be a wastage of public exchequer money is, so, hereby rejected. THIS is issued in tune with the Hon'ble High Court Order dated-02 08 2024 Inform all concerned.” 8. It is thus apparent that the directions issued by this Court vide judgment & order dated 02.08.2024 in WP(C) No. 3478/2022 has been duly complied with. 9. In view of the above, nothing survives for adjudication in the present contempt petition. However, the petitioner is at liberty to raise his grievance in accordance with law before the competent authority in the event there is any dispute in relation to the order dated 11.08.2026. 10. Accordingly, the contempt petition stands closed. 11. The notice of contempt, if any, stands discharged. JUDGE Comparing Assistant