Disposed

Tapan Medhi v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Jun 2023WP(C)/1965/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court disposed of a writ petition by the petitioner seeking payment of admitted contractual dues. The Court, noting admission of liability and a prior common order covering similar cases, disposed of the matter in line with that common order.

What did the court decide?

Disposed of in similar terms as the common order dated 27.09.2022 passed in the batch of writ petitions including W.P.[C] no. 4734/2021.

Tapan Medhi Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010052232021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/1965/2021

¶5

TAPAN MEDHI

¶6

S/O LATE AMRIT MEDHI, RESIDENT OF SALANA, PO AND PS KHETRI, DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM 782403

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

¶9

REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 06

¶10

2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER

¶11

WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI 03

¶12

3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER

¶13

NAGAON WATER RESOURCES CIRCLE NAGAON 782001

¶14

4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

¶15

MORIGAON WATER RESOURCES DIVISION MORIGAON 782105

¶16

5:THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

¶17

JAGIROAD WATER RESOURCES SUB DIVISION

¶18

Page No.# 2/3

¶19

JAGIROAD 78241

¶20

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S MUKTAR

¶21

Advocate for the Respondent : SC. WATER RESOURCE DEPTT.

¶22

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Date : 05-06-2023

¶25

Heard Mr. S. Muktar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. B. Goswami, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam assisted by Mr. P. Kataki, learned counsel; and Mr. J. Handique, learned State Counsel.

¶26

It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to work orders received from the respondent authorities in the Water Resources Department to execute certain contract works under the Flood Management and Boarder Areas Programme [MFBAP] Scheme of the Government of India, he had proceeded to execute the same and in due course, completed the same to the satisfaction of the respondent authorities. Pursuant to completion of the contract works, he had submitted the final bills amounting to Rs. 3,23,979/- for such contract works.

¶27

The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department has filed a counter affidavit wherein it is admitted that the outstanding liability of the Water Resources Department to the petitioner is an amount of Rs. 3,23,979/-.

¶28

The learned counsel for the parties have submitted that in respect of the contract works executed under the FMBAP Scheme, the financial burden of the

¶29

Page No.# 3/3

¶30

Government of India was up-to 80% and the share of the Government of Assam was to the extent of 20%. It is further submitted by them that a batch of writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 4734/2021 and others, involving similar issue like the one involved in this writ petition i.e. non-disbursal of admitted liability of outstanding contractual dues, were already disposed of by a common order dated 27.09.2022. It is submitted by Mr. Goswami, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam that the issue involved in this writ petition includes the matter of non-disbursal of an admitted liability to the extent of Rs. 3,23,979/- and the same is clearly covered by the common order dated 27.09.2022. He has, thus, submitted that this writ petition can also be disposed of in similar terms.

¶31

In view of admission of liability by the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department in its counter affidavit to the extent of Rs. 3,23,979/-, and since the issue involved in this writ petition is already covered by the common order dated 27.09.2022, this writ petition is disposed of in similar terms as made in the common order dated 27.09.2022 passed in the batch of writ petitions including W.P.[C] no. 4734/2021.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Tapan Medhi v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tapan Medhi 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Khurshid Alom Ahmed and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Mamina Begum Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Murtaza and 21 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Saha Jamal @ Sahjamal Ali and 2 Ors. Vs Gas Authority of India Ltd. and 5 Ors.

Tapan Medhi Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Tapan Medhi Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.