Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9049 (GAU)

DIPANKAR RAY v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS

WP(C)/3417/2026 · 2026-06-24

Sanjay Kumar Medhi

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010127052026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3417/2026 DIPANKAR RAY SON OF- LATE DEBALA KANTA RAY, RESIDENT OF- VILLAGE- NARABARI BAZAR, P.O.- KOKRAJHAR, PIN -783370, DISTRICT -KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI - 781006. 2:THE BOROLAND TERRITORIAL AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY KOKRAJHAR (BTAD) ASSAM. 3:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI - 781006. 4:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM STATE HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI - 781006. 5:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM B.K. KAKATY ROAD ULUBARI Page No.# 2/3 GUWAHATI -781007. 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE KOKRAJHAR (BTAD) ASSAM 7:THE MOTOR TRANSPORT OFFICER (M.T.O) KOKRAJHAR (BTAD) ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. A H LASKAR, MR A K SHARMA,MR. A T H AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, BTADC BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 25.06.2026 Heard Shri A.H. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner, who has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for release of bills pertaining to hire charge of certain vehicles which was given by him to the Superintendent of Police, Kokrajhar for the period, 2016 to 2026. He has submitted that the bills were received and there is an acknowledgment. Shri R. Talukdar, learned State Counsel has however contended that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Full Bench, in the case of Tamsher Ali vs. State of Assam reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1 amongst others, there has to be an acknowledgment in writing of the liability by the Chief Engineer/ Head of the Department to entertain a writ petition. He submits that there is no such acknowledgment of the liability in writing. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to withdraw this Page No.# 3/3 writ petition with liberty either to file afresh with proper documents or to approach the Civil Court. Writ petition accordingly stands dismissed with liberty as prayed for. JUDGE Comparing Assistant