Disposed

Debananda Doley v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC1 Apr 2022WP(C)/7337/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a Class-I contractor seeking release of retained security deposits. The Court directed the Agriculture Department to release the amounts as soon as supplementary demand funds are received, within four months.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed with direction to respondent authorities to release security deposit amounts within four months of receipt of funds against the supplementary demand.

Debananda Doley Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors. — Property and Title | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010233192018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/7337/2018

¶5

DEBANANDA DOLEY S/O LATE KETONG DOLEY VILL- KULAPATHAR P.O. ARADHAL DIST.DHEMAJI, ASSAM PIN - 787057.

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS.

¶8

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

¶9

2:THE DIRECTOR

¶10

GOVT. OF ASSAM AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT

¶11

KHANAPARA KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI-22.

¶12

3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER

¶13

AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF ASSAM KHANAPARA KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI-22.

¶14

4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (AGRICULTURE)

¶15

Page No.# 2/4

¶16

DHEMAJI DIVISION

¶17

DHEMAJI ASSAM. 5:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY

¶18

GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6

¶19

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. L GOGOI

¶20

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶21

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶22

ORDER

¶23

01.04.2022

¶24

Heard Mr. L. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Agriculture Department for the respondent nos. 1 – 4; and Mr. R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department for the respondent no. 5.

¶25

The case of the petitioner is that he as a registered Class-I Contractor under the respondent Agriculture Department, had completed a number of contract-works to the satisfaction of the respondent authorities in the Agriculture Department. Amongst those contract-works the petitioner had executed with the respondent Agriculture Department, 4 [four] nos. of contract-works are as follows :-

¶26

[i] Construction of covered Threshing Floor at 2 no. Srirampuria in Dhemaji District under BGREL 2012-2013

¶27

Page No.# 3/4

¶28

[ii] Construction of covered Threshing Floor at Kathalguri Hanchara in Dhemaji District under BGREL 2012-2013

¶29

[iii] Construction of covered Threshing Floor at Bolaipam in Dhemaji District under BGREL 2012-2013

¶30

[iv] Construction of covered Threshing Floor at Gholipara in Dhemaji District under BGREL 2012-2013

¶31

2.1. It is the further case of the petitioner is that he completed the afore-stated 4 [four] nos. of contract-works to the satisfaction of the respondent authorities in the Agriculture Department and submitted his final bills in respect of those 4 [four] nos. of contract-works. The respondent authorities in the Agriculture Department had paid the final bill amounts in respect of the 4 [four] contract-works to the petitioner but the security deposit amounts in respect of the said 4 [four] nos. of contract-works have been retained at their end and the same have not been released till date. The security deposit amounts for the 4 [four] nos. of contract-works are to the following effect :-

¶32

Sl. No.	Name of contract-work	Amount
i.	Construction of covered Threshing Floor at 2 No. Srirampuria in Dhemaji District under BGREL 2012-2013	Rs. 88,380/-
ii.	Construction of covered Threshing Floor at Kathalguri Hanchara in Dhemaji District under BGREL 2012-2013	Rs. 78,684/-
iii.	Construction of covered Threshing Floor at Bolaipam in Dhemaji District under BGREL 2012-2013	Rs. 1,01,650/-
iv.	Construction of covered Threshing Floor at Gholipara in Dhemaji District under BGREL 2012-2013	Rs. 92,876/-

¶33

Mr. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Agriculture Department has submitted, on

¶34

Page No.# 4/4

¶35

instruction, that the amounts as regards the security deposit of the petitioner have been included in the supplementary demand for the financial year : 2022-2023 as there is paucity of found and the same would be released as and when the fund in respect of the supplementary demand is received from the Government. He has, therefore, submitted that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities in the Agriculture Department to release the security deposit amounts which have not yet been released by the respondent authorities in the Agriculture Department as and when the fund is received from the Government.

¶36

Mr. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to the above submission of Mr. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Agriculture Department.

¶37

Having considered the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that instead of keeping this writ petition pending, the same can be disposed of, at this stage itself, having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Agriculture Department. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent authorities in the Agriculture Department to release the amounts as regards security deposits of the petitioner retained by them in respect of the 4 [four] nos. of contract-works, indicated above, as soon as the fund is received against the supplementary demand already submitted by them to the Government, preferably within a period of 4 [four] months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order by the petitioner. The petitioner shall submit a copy of this order to the office of the respondent no. 2 i.e. the Director, Agriculture Department, Assam.

¶38

Comparing Assistant

Debananda Doley v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Debananda Doley v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kaushik Khemka Vs the State of Assam

Sub-Divisional S. T. Development Board, Dibrugarh and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Amlan Dey Vs Pradip Kumar Roy and 4 Ors. E

Jarina Parbin Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Binod Ch Barman Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Rabin Medhi Vs the State of Assam