Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010210952025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5605/2025 PUNA SINGH SON OF GOKUL SINGH, R/O KHARIKHANA, P.O.- KHARIKHANA, P.S.- LANKA, DIST- HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN-782446 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM B.K. KAKATY ROAD ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007. 4:THE ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENEAL OF POLICE (A) ASSAM B.K. KAKATY ROAD ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007. 5:THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CUM DISTRICT COMMISSIONER WEST KARBI ANGLONG HAMREN DISTRICT- WEST KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM. PIN- 782486 Page No.# 2/5 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE WEST KARBI ANGLONG HAMREN DISTRICT- WEST KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM. PIN- 782486 7:THE MOTOR TRANSPORT OFFICER (MTO) POLICE RESERVE HAMREN DISTRICT- WEST KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM. PIN-78248 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K SINGH, S SINGH Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FINANCE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 05.01.2026 Heard Shri S. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. U. Das, learned State Counsel, Assam. 2. Considering the subject matter involved and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage. 3. As per the facts projected, the petitioner is the registered owner of a vehicle, namely, TATA Sumo, bearing Registration No. AS-09 AC 2084. The said vehicle was taken on hire by the District Administration of West Karbi Anglong and was used for official duties. The period of such use ranged between 01.04.2021 to 30.11.2022 for which, the petitioner had submitted bills amounting to Rs. 8,33,278/- (Rupees Eight lakhs thirty three thousand two hundred and seventy eight) only. However, the said bills have not been cleared and therefore, the writ petition was filed. Page No.# 3/5 4. Shri Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is an admission of the liability and therefore, appropriate directions are required to be passed for clearing the bills. 5. Ms. Das, learned State Counsel has submitted that the amount in question is admitted and in this connection, she has referred to the averments made in paragraph 8 of the affidavit-in-opposition dated 05.12.2025 filed by the respondent no. 5 which reads as follows: “8. That with regard to the statement made in paragraph No. 6 of the writ petition, the answering deponent begs to state that for the vehicle bearing Registration No. AS- 09AC-2084, TATA Sumo), the payment has been duly made to the vehicle owner Shri Puna Singh, against Vehicle Hiring Order No. HNZ/CIOPS- 7/PT-II/2019-21/152 for the period from 01-04-2021 to 30-04 2021. in accordance with the Government's prescribed daily hiring rate. The total amount paid is Rs. 41,046/- (Rupees Forty-One Thousand and Forty-Six) only vide this office sanction Order No. WKAH/Nazarat-10/CIOPS-Finance/2020- 2021/63 dated 28-08-2021. Copy of the order vide Memo No. HNZ/CIOPS-7/PT-II/2019-21/152 dated 05-04-2021 is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-II. The answering deponent further begs to state that the assertion regarding payment of Rs. 8,33,278/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Thirty-Three Thousand Two Hundred and Seventy-Eight) only is not correct, after due payment for the period from 01- 04-2021 to 30-04-2021. The answering deponent further begs to state that the outstanding liability for the subsequent period from 01-05-2021 to 01-11-2022 stands at Rs. 7,92,232/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Ninety-Two. Thousand Two Hundred and Thirty-Two) only.” Page No.# 4/5 6. The aspect of exercise of jurisdiction by a Writ Court in contractual matter has been clarified by a Full Bench of this Court in the case of Tamsher Ali & Ors. Vs. State of Assam & Ors., reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1 wherein, the following guidelines have been laid down: “i) All claims for payment of outstanding dues would be entertained for consideration provided the same are admitted by the respective departments. The admissions of liability shall have to be certified by the respective Chief Engineer in respect of Works Departments and in respect of other departments by the Head of the departments. ii) All claims for payment of admitted outstanding dues would be entertained for payment provided the claims are lodged before the competent authority within a period of three years from the date of the payment becoming due. iii) All claims for payment of admitted outstanding dues in respect of which the contractors intend or have approached the Hon'ble Court, in such cases, the contractors must approach the Hon'ble High Court within a period of 3 years from the date of the payment becoming due. This view has been taken as the Hon'ble Apex Court in the State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Bhailal Bhai and Ors. reported in AIR 1964 SC 1006 at Para 21 has observed that though provisions of Limitation Act do not as such apply to proceedings under Article 226, the period of Limitation prescribed by Limitation Act for instituting a civil action may ordinarily be taken to be a reasonable standard by which delay in seeking remedy under Article 226 can be measured.” 7. Considering the above and the admitted position as stated in the affidavit-in- opposition, the instant writ petition is allowed by directing consideration of the case of the petitioner for payment of his contractual bills in terms with the directions of the Full Bench in the case of Tamsher Ali (supra). Page No.# 5/5 8. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant