Disposed

Dinamani Haloi v. the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC15 Feb 2024WP(C)/699/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought payment of an unpaid contractual bill. Petitioners consented to directions issued in a leading case upon re-verification of the claimed amount. The court disposed of the petition directing re-verification followed by directed compliance.

What the court decided

AI extract

Dinamani Haloi Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors. — Money Laundering | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010026512024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/699/2024

¶5

DINAMANI HALOI

¶6

S/O SRI RAJENDRA NATH HALOI

¶7

RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P O BIHAMPUR, PS BELSOR, DIST NALBARI, ASSAM

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS

¶10

REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTRY OF JAL SAKTI, DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCE AND RIVER DEVELOPMENT AND GANGA REJUNEVATION.

¶11

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM WATER RESOURCE DEPARMTENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 KAMRUP M ASSAM

¶12

3:THE BRAHMAPUTRA BOARD ASSAM REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN NH37 BASISTHA GUWAHATI ASSAM

¶13

4:THE CHIEF ENGINEER

¶14

WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI KAMRUP M ASSAM

¶15

5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

¶16

GUWAHATI EAST WATER RESOURCES DIVISION

¶17

Page No.# 2/4

¶18

GUWAHATI KAMRUP M ASSAM

¶19

6:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHAT

¶20

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S CHUTIA

¶21

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶22

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Date : 16.02.2024

¶25

Heard Ms. S. Chutia, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the contractual bill amounting to Rs. 5,40,707/- for the works executed by the petitioner under the scheme ‘Channelization of River Brahmaputra from downstream of Saraighat bridge to Gondhmow area’, has not been paid to the petitioner.

¶26

The petitioner’s counsel submits that in a series of matters, i.e., leading case being WP(C) 4734/2021 (Nazim Hussain -vs- The State of Assam and 8 others), this Court has given certain directions for payment of the said amount and accordingly prays for a similar direction to be issued in this case.

¶27

Ms. R. Deka, learned counsel for the Water Resource Department and Mr. B. Gogoi, learned counsel for the Finance Department as well as Ms. A. Gayan, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 submit that they have got no objection to the prayer of the petitioner’s counsel, subject to re-verification of the amount payable to the petitioner.

¶28

Page No.# 3/4

¶29

I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶30

This Court, in a series of cases, leading case being WP(C) 4734/2021 (Nazim Hussain -vs- The State of Assam and 8 others), while disposing of the similar matters, had passed the following direction, which are as follows:-

¶31

“(1) Within 15 (fifteen) days from today, the concerned official of the State Government of Assam will communicate the supplementary budget passed in the last Assembly Session pertaining to the scheme to the competent authority of the Ministry of Jal Shakti, Government of India.

¶32

(2) Within 60 (sixty) days from the date of receipt of such communication, the Ministry of Jal Shakti to release the amount due under the schemes to the concerned Department of the Government of Assam.

¶33

(3) Upon receipt of the amount, bills of the writ petitioners shall be processed and cleared within a further period of 45 day”

¶34

In view of the consent of the parties and in view of the liability statement attached to the letter No. GED/A-181/Pt.-II/19 dated 22.11.2022, issued by the Executive Engineer, Guwahati East W.R. Division, this Court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of at the motion stage itself.

¶35

In view of there being an admission made by the respondent No. 5, the respondent No. 4 is directed to re-verify and thereafter take a decision with regard to whether the amount claimed by the petitioner is as per records. In the event, the respondent No. 4 comes to a decision that the amount claimed is an admitted amount, the direction passed in WP(C)4734/2021, which has been enumerated above, shall be complied with. The respondents shall thereafter complete the entire process, within a period of 5 (five) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶36

Page No.# 4/4

¶37

8. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

Comparing Assistant

Dinamani Haloi v. the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Dinamani Haloi v. the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Kajal Kumar Das Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

M/S. Shiv Steel Industries Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

M/S No. 10 Kolong Nodi Part-Iv, Min Samabai Samiti Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Pradip Kumar Das Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Pradip Kumar Das Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.