Allowed

M/S. Joganiar Construction and Anr. v. the Guwahati Municipal Corporation and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC12 Nov 2018WP(C)/5146/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a writ for payment of Rs. 6,27,800 for completed road repair work. The Court directed the GMC to pursue fund release from the Deputy Commissioner and ensure payment within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Undertaking given by Respondent to ensure payment of pending dues within 6 weeks.

What the court decided

M/S. Joganiar Construction and Anr. Vs the… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010167222018

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 5146/2018

¶5

1:M/S. JOGANIAR CONSTRUCTION AND ANR.

¶6

A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT, C.K.ROAD, PANBAZAR, GHY-1, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, REP. HEREIN BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI RASSEL HUSSAIN

¶7

2: MR. RASSEL HUSSAIN S/O- MR. HAIDAR HUSSAIN R/O- C.K.ROAD PANBAZAR GHY-1 DIST- KAMRUP (M) ASSA

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

1:THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND 3 ORS. REP. HEREIN BY ITS COMMISSIONER, PANBAZAR, GHY, ASSAM-1

¶10

2:THE COMMISSIONER THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PANBAZAR GHY ASSAM- 781001

¶11

3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PANBAZAR GHY ASSAM- 781001

¶12

4:THE DIVISIONAL EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DIVISION NO. IV

¶13

Page No.# 2/3

¶14

THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION FANCYBAZAR GHY ASSAM- 78100

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BORTHAKUR

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, GMC

¶17

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Date : 12-11-2018

¶20

Heard Mr D Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr S Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Gauhati Municipal Corporation (GMC).

¶21

By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to release the payment for the work executed by him for separate work orders dated 07.08.2015, which amount has been quantified at Rs. 6,27,800.00.

¶22

Case of the petitioners is that petitioner No. 1 is a proprietorial firm of which petitioner No. 2 is the proprietor. Petitioner No. 1 is engaged in various construction works. Pursuant to a tender process, petitioner No. 1 was selected by Commissioner, GMC, i.e., respondent No. 2 for execution of the work: Repair and Restoration of Srimantapur Road under GMC Division-IV from the budget of the year 2014-15 under FDR Scheme, Package No. GMC/FDR/D-IV/AF. In this connection, a contract agreement was signed between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2, whereafter notice to proceed with work dated 07.09.2015 was issued by respondent No. 2 to petitioner No. 1 to proceed with the execution of the work at the bid price of Rs. 6,27,800.00.

¶23

According to the petitioners, petitioner No. 1 had executed and completed the work in acknowledgment of which completion certificate dated 20.11.2015 was issued by the Executive Engineer, Division-IV, GMC.

¶24

On completion of the work, GMC prepared the work value in respect of the work executed by the petitioners amounting to Rs. 6,27,800.00.

¶25

Grievance of the petitioners is that no payment has been released to them though payments to

¶26

Page No.# 3/3

¶27

other contractors have been released. It is with such grievance that the present writ petition has been filed seeking the relief as indicated above.

¶28

When the writ petition was first moved on 03.08.2018, learned Standing Counsel, GMC, was directed to obtain instructions as to how much money was due to the petitioners for execution of the contract work. Thereafter, several adjournments were taken by respondent No. 1, GMC.

¶29

Today, when the matter is called upon, Mr Bora, learned Standing Counsel, GMC, submits on the basis of written instructions that though GMC does not dispute the contractual dues claimed by the petitioners, the payment can be made only upon release of funds by the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro). As and when funds are released by the Deputy Commissioner, payment would be made to the petitioners.

¶30

On a query by the Court, Mr Bora submits that GMC had already moved the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) for release of funds.

¶31

This is an internal matter between GMC and Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro). Since the tendering authority is respondent No. 2, it is the duty of respondent No. 2 to ensure that payment is made to petitioner No. 1 in terms of the work order issued to petitioner No. 1. Respondent No. 2 shall pursue the matter with Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro), who shall also do the needful and ensure that the outstanding dues of the petitioners pertaining to the aforesaid work are paid within a period of 6 (six) weeks from today.

¶32

Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

Comparing Assistant

M/S. Joganiar Construction and Anr. v. the Guwahati Municipal Corporation and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

M/S. Joganiar Construction and Anr. v. the Guwahati Municipal Corporation and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dehing Satra , Dehing Than Gaon Dibrugarh Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

M/S. Sehee Donyi Enterprise Vs Food Corporation of India Fci and 4 Ors.

M/S Raitani Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Union of India and Anr.

M/S Tushar Service Station Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Hiralal Baxi and 7 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Bhumiheen Bhumiputra Sansthapan Committee and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.