Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010031682025 2026:GAU-AS:8279 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/861/2025 NABA KUMAR BORDALAI S/O LATE JANMI JOY BORDALAI R/O WARD NO. 4, SANTIPUR, P.O. ANDP.S. MANGALDAI,DARRANG, PIN- 784125, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI, KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM,PIN-781006 2:THE COMMISSIONER FINANCE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI KAMRUP (METRO) ASSAM PIN-781006 3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT CHANDMARI GUWAHATI KAMRUP (METRO) ASSAM PIN- 781003 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER Page No.# 2/6 MANGALDAI WATER RESOURCE DIVISION MANGALDAI DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784125 5:THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MANGALDAI -DALGAON- WATER RESOURCESUB-DISTRICT MANGALDAI DARRANG ASSAM PIN-78412 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. G. Rahul, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Ms. R. Deka, SC, Water Resources Date on which judgment is reserved : NA Date of pronouncement of judgment : 10.06..2026 Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative part of the judgment? : Yes Whether the full judgment has been Pronounced? : Yes JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Heard Mr. G. Rahul, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. Ms. R. Deka, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Water Resources Department. Page No.# 3/6 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner challenging the non-payment of the admitted amount of Rs.1,98,452/- in respect of the contractual work, i.e. “Raising and Strengthening of Bornadi L/B embankment from Patgirichuba to R. K. Embankment (Ch. 0 m to 30000 m) (K- Building) for Electrification work of Divisional Office Building at Divisional Office Campus, Mangaldai” allotted by the Water Resources Department, Assam vide the Work order dated 29.08.2016 issued by the Executive Engineer, Mangaldai Water Resource Division, Mangaldai. 3. The case of the Petitioner herein is that the Petitioner is a registered Government Contractor and he was allotted the contractual work vide the Work Order dated 29.08.2016 by the Respondents and the Petitioner had successfully completed the said work in question to the utmost satisfaction of all concerned. After completion of the works, the Respondent Authorities had made part payment to the Petitioner from time to time. Since no final payment was made, the Petitioner submitted an application on 29.07.2024 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 seeking details about the admitted outstanding liabilities. Pursuant thereto, the Respondent Authorities vide the letter dated 22.08.2024 had admitted that a total amount of Rs.1,98,452/- is due to the Petitioner by the Respondents and a payment of Page No.# 4/6 Rs.1,00,000/- has already been made. Being aggrieved the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner has been pursuing the matter bonafidely and diligently with the Respondents, but the Respondent Authorities have not shown any interest in making payment of the admitted amount of Rs.1,98,452/- due to the Petitioner, for which the Petitioner is facing hardship. The learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that the Respondent Authorities have failed to discharge their duty in accordance with law and the same has caused prejudice to the Petitioner. Hence, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition. 5. Ms. R. Deka, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Water Resources Department submitted that she has not received any instruction in the matter. Be that as it may, the learned Standing Counsel of the Water Resources Department, however, submitted that as to whether the Petitioner was awarded the contract and whether the Petitioner had completed the work and is entitled to the amount claimed or any other amount would be subject to certain verifications which are required to be conducted by the Respondent Authorities. Page No.# 5/6 6. This Court is of the opinion that if the Petitioner has been awarded the contract and thereupon has duly completed the work, the Respondent Authorities cannot deny the Petitioner to the contractual amount which the Petitioner is entitled to as per law as well as the terms of the agreement. 7. It is the opinion of this Court that the said would require certain verifications to be carried out by the concerned Respondent Authorities. 8. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions:- (i) The Respondent Authorities shall verify as to whether the contract in question was awarded to the Petitioner and as to whether the Petitioner had successfully executed the work, i.e. “Raising and Strengthening of Bornadi L/B embankment from Patgirichuba to R. K. Embankment (Ch. 0 m to 30000 m) (K-Building) for Electrification work of Divisional Office Building at Divisional Office Campus, Mangaldai” under the Mangaldai Water Resource Division, Government of Assam”. (ii) The Respondent Authorities shall also verify as to whether the Petitioner had submitted the requisite documents which are required for the purpose of releasing Page No.# 6/6 the amount due as claimed by the Petitioner. (iii) The Respondent Authorities shall also verify the entitlement of the Petitioner to the dues, and if upon verification in the manner stated above, it is found that the Petitioner is entitled to any such amount, the Respondent Authorities shall pay the same to the Petitioner. (iv) The above exercise be completed within a period of 6 (six) months from the date a certified copy of the instant order is served upon the Respondent No.3, i.e. the Chief Engineer, Water Resource Department, Chandmari, Guwahati, Assam. JUDGE Comparing Assistant