Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010123202026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3283/2026 BHARAT PRASAD CHAWRASIA SO KRISHNA PRASAD CHAWRASIA, RO SIMONA BASTI, PO SALANA, DIST NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN 782139 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, ROAD DIVISION, ASSAM CIVIL SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GHY, ASSAM, PIN 781006 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PWD ROADS ASSAM CHANDMARI GHY ASSAM PIN 781003 3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PWD ROADS NAGAON ROAD CIRCLE DIST NAGAON ASSAM 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD KALIABOR RURAL ROAD DIVISION JAKHALABANDHA NAGAON ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 5:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE ASSAM CIVIL SECRETARIAT DISPUR GHY ASSAM PIN 78100 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B PURKAYASTHA, MR P BHATTACHARJYA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FINANCE, SC, PWD BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 22.06.2026 Heard Shri B. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner, who by means of this petition has prayed for release of contractual dues amounting to Rs. 6,76,618/-. Shri Purkayastha, learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to an acknowledgement of the liability issued by the Addl. Chief Engineer, PWD. On the other hand, Shri B. Chowdhury, learned Standing Counsel, PWD has submitted that the works are of the years, 1997, 2002 and 2005 and therefore, the claims is barred by law. He has also submitted that the communication issued by the Chief Engineer is of the year 2016 and the recent communication dated 17.03.2026 is not by the Chief Engineer but by the Executive Engineer. The scope of interference by a Writ Court in matters relating to claim of contractual dues is limited as the same involves questions of facts which are disputed in nature. The Hon’ble Full Bench of this Court in the case of Tamsher Ali & Ors. Vs. State of Assam & Ors., reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1 has, however, laid down certain exceptions which, amongst others requires an acknowledgment of the liability in writing by the Chief Engineer/ Head of the Department. There is another requirement Page No.# 3/3 that such claims have to be raised before the authorities within 3 years from the date of dues. Admittedly, the aforesaid requirements have not been fulfilled by the petitioner. Accordingly, this Court will not have the scope to entertain such writ petition. The writ petition accordingly stands dismissed. The dismissal of this writ petition, however, shall not be an impediment on the part of the petitioner to approach the appropriate Court for redressal of the grievance in accordance with law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant