Disposed

Nawab Nasim Hazarika v. the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC9 Aug 2023WP(C)/2153/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The plaintiff petitioned for a direction to pay balance dues for completed work. The court directed the respondent to verify entitlement and pay any due amount within one month, citing a Full Bench judgment.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.2 to complete verification within one month and pay the entitled amount if found due.

Nawab Nasim Hazarika Vs the State of Assam… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010068712018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/2153/2018

¶5

NAWAB NASIM HAZARIKA

¶6

PROPRIETOR OF M/S PEACE ASSOCIATES, S/O NABAB AHMED, SEWALI PATH, HATIGAON, GUWAHATI-38, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS.

¶9

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

¶10

2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PHE ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3

¶11

3:THE ADDL. CHIEF ENGINEER (PHE) UPPER ASSAM ZONE NAGAON PO AND DIST. NAGAON ASSA

¶12

For the Petitioner(s) : None appears

¶13

For the Respondent(s) : Ms. S. Ahmed, Advocate

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Date : 09.08.2023

¶18

The instant writ petition has been filed seeking a direction upon the Respondents to make the balance payment payable to the Petitioner in respect to the work done by the Petitioner.

¶19

It reveals from the pleadings as well as the documents enclosed that the Respondents issued a Notice Inviting Tender for the work of construction of treatment plant & charging of Filter Media, UGR, Pump House, Grade-IV Quarter site Development, Approach Road, Drain and Apron, Labour Charge for Distribution system of Bahguri Miri PWSS and Dhemaji PWSS under NRDWP (Quality) Programme of Bokakhat (PHE) Division (Group 1) with tender value of Rs.19,87,100/- only and Rs.20,14,100/- only. The Petitioner was allotted the said work and submitted his bills. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner duly completed the said works as per the specification and within the time stipulated.

¶20

It further transpires from the pleadings that the Petitioner received certain amounts of money however the Petitioner claims that he is yet to receive the balance amount for which the Petitioner had represented before the authorities time and again.

¶21

It is further relevant to take note of Annexure-E to the writ petition i.e. the replies given by the State Public Information Officer of the Office of the Executive Engineer (PHE), Bokakhat Division. From a perusal of the said information so given, it is seen that certain amounts were not disbursed on

¶22

Page No.# 3/3

¶23

account of non-availability of the funds.

¶24

It is the opinion of this Court that if the Petitioner had duly completed the work, the Petitioner ought to be paid his entitlement as per the contract. Ms. S. Ahmed, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the PHE Department has submitted that the fact that the Petitioner was allotted the work in question is not in dispute but the actual entitlement can only be ascertained after due verifications.

¶25

Taking into account the above, this Court therefore disposes of the instant writ petition with the direction to the Respondents more particularly the Respondent No.2 to take appropriate steps for verification as to whether the Petitioner is entitled to any amount in respect to the works allotted to the Petitioner and if it is found that the Petitioner is entitled to any amount, the same be paid in terms with the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Tamsher Ali and Others Vs. State of Assam and others reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1.

¶26

The said verification be completed within a period of 1 (one) month from the date a certified copy of the instant order is served upon Respondent No.2.

¶27

With above observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Nawab Nasim Hazarika v. the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nawab Nasim Hazarika v. the State of Assam and 2 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

Chandan Paul Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Satnam Singh Vs the Union of India and Ors.

The Workman of Borjan Tea Estate Vs the Management of Borjan Tea Estate and Anr.

Fulbar Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 12 Ors.

Mridul Gogoi Vs Aditya Vikram Yadav, IAS

Gobin Buragohain Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.