Dismissed

Kushal Ch. Baishya @ Kushal Baishya v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC1 Feb 2022WP(C)/559/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the non-payment of Rs. 2,85,956/- for completed works, the Gauhati High Court, addressed the counsel for both parties. The Court directed the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner's case in terms of the directions issued by the Full Bench in Tamsher Ali v. State of Assam.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to respondent authorities to consider the petitioner's case in terms of Tamsher Ali.

Kushal Ch. Baishya @ Kushal Baishya Vs the State of… — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010013672022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/559/2022

¶5

KUSHAL CH. BAISHYA @ KUSHAL BAISHYA S/O- LATE DHANIRAM BAISHYA, R/O- VILL.- DOLIBARI, P.S. HAJO, P.O. DADARA, DIST.- KAMRUP, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

¶8

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

¶9

2:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER GUWAHATI EAST WATER RESOURCE DIVISION REHABARI GUWAHATI-8.

¶10

3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER SOUTHERN ASSAM WATER RESOURCE CIRCLE CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3.

¶11

4:THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A SHEIKH

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, WATER RESOURCE

¶14

Page No.# 2/2

¶15

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Date : 01-02-2022

¶18

Heard Ms. F Intaz, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P Kakoti, learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondents.

¶19

The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the inaction of the respondent authorities in not making the payment of an amount of Rs.2,85,956/- which is the balance due to the petitioner in respect to the works completed by the petitioner.

¶20

The counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court had issued similar directions whereby the respondent authorities were directed to act in terms with the judgment of the Full Bench in the case of Tamsher Ali v. State of Assam & ors reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1. The counsel for the respondents submits that he has no objection if such similar direction to that effect is being passed directing the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner in terms with the judgment of this Court in Tamsher Ali (supra).

¶21

Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner in terms with the directions issued by the Full Bench of this Court Tamsher Ali (supra)

¶22

Writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶23

JUDGE

¶24

Comparing Assistant

Kushal Ch. Baishya @ Kushal Baishya v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kushal Ch. Baishya @ Kushal Baishya v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rupjan Bibi Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Mazibur Rahman and 5 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Jewti N.G.O. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Manaj Kr. Brahma Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Samrat Dutta Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Gamala Boro Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.