Allowed

Utpal Deka and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC1 Aug 2024WP(C)/1496/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court disposed of a writ petition wherein petitioner contractors sought payment of admitted dues. Upon confirmation that the State admitted the liability of Rs.10,43,839/-, the court directed the Revenue and Disaster Management Department to make funds available for payment within four months.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No.5 to make funds available for payment of admitted dues of Rs.10,43,839/- within four months.

Utpal Deka and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010050762023

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/1496/2023

¶5

UTPAL DEKA AND ANR S/O- LT. CHANA RAM DEKA

¶6

RESIDENT OF MANGALDOI GAON

¶7

P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDOI

¶8

DIST.- DARRANG ASSAM

¶9

PIN- 784125.

¶10

2: M/S MUNMI ENTERPRISE REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR

¶11

SRI UTPAL DEKA

¶12

S/O- LT. CHANA RAM DEKA

¶13

RESIDENT OF MANGALDOI GAON

¶14

P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDOI

¶15

DIST.- DARRANG ASSAM

¶16

PIN- 784125. VERSUS

¶17

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

¶18

WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT

¶19

Page No.# 2/4

¶20

DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 ASSAM. 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3 ASSAM.

¶21

3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER SOUTHERN ASSAM CIRCLE WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3 ASSAM. 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MANGALDOI WATER RESOURCES DIVISION MANGALDOI ASSAM.

¶22

5:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT (GENERAL) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 ASSAM.

¶23

6:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DARRANG MANGALDOI ASSAM. -----------Advocate for : MR. P K MAZUMDAR Advocate for : SC WATER RESOURCE appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS

¶24

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶25

ORDER

¶26

02.08.2024

¶27

Heard Mr. P.K. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioners, who are (i)

¶28

Page No.# 3/4

¶29

Utpal Deka and (ii) M/s Munmi Enterprise, represented by the petitioner no.1. Also heard Mr. S.R. Barua, learned counsel for the respondent no.6 and Ms. R. Deka, learned counsel for the respondent nos.1,2, 3 & 4. Mr. H. Handique, learned counsel appears for the respondent no.5.

¶30

The petitioners have filed the present writ petition, praying for release of their contractual bills, in respect of the works done by the petitioners, namely “Immediate measures to restore flood damages on Noanadi L/B embankment from Sitikapara to Rajghat (including closing of breach at Mojachuburi) under SDRF 2018-19 (Part-I)”.

¶31

The petitioners’ case is that despite issuance of Completion Certificate by the Executive Engineer, Mangaldoi Water Resources Division, the petitioners have not been paid their contractual dues, which are as follows :

¶32

(i) Utpal Deka – Rs.5,44,554/-

¶33

(ii) M/s Munmi Enterprise – Rs.4,99,285/-

¶34

The petitioners’ counsel prays that the total amount of Rs.10,43,839/should be paid by the respondents.

¶35

5 Mr. S.R. Barua, learned counsel for the respondent no.6 has produced the records and also submitted the parawise comments received by him, in respect of the present writ petition.

¶36

Page No.# 4/4

¶37

The parawise comments which has submitted by Mr. S.R. Barua and the documents annexed with the parawise comments are made a part of the record and marked as Annexure-X collectively.

¶38

A perusal of the same shows that the State respondents have admitted to the fact that they have to pay the total amount of Rs.10,43,839/- to the petitioners, as has been claimed by the petitioners in the foregoing paragraphs.

¶39

In view of the fact that the petitioners’ claim are admitted amounts, the respondent no.5 is directed to make funds available to the other respondents, for payment of the admitted dues of the petitioners. Thereafter the admitted contractual dues should be paid. The entire exercise should be concluded within a period of 4 (four) months, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶40

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶41

Comparing Assistant

¶42

JUDGE

Utpal Deka and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Utpal Deka and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 5 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

Dr Hari Ram Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Anupam Singha Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

M/S P P Enterprises and 3 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 8 Ors.

Minarul Amin Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Kalpa Adhikari Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Lakh Bahadur Chetri Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.