M/S Macrocosm Builders Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

M/S Macrocosm Builders Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No. 4 (Executive Engineer, PWD Roads, Barpeta Mandia & Chenga Territorial Road Division) to take a decision on the petitioner's representation dated 28.03.2024 within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the Court's order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the PWD can deduct Forest Royalty under the Assam Minor Minerals Rules, 2013 from the petitioner's running bills in the absence of a clause to that effect in the agreement between the petitioner and the PWD (as urged by the petitioner, relying on Trinayan Associates and Muslim Ali (Md.)). +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 4 to take a decision on the petitioner's representation dated 28.03.2024 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the Court's order. The Court did not itself adjudicate the permissibility of deducting Forest Royalty; that question was left to respondent No. 4's decision on the representation.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Lanusungkum Jamir, J.), WP(C)/1236/2025, order dated 13.03.2025 — Forest Royalty deduction from running bills; disposed of with direction. M/S Macrocosm Builders was issued a Notice to Proceed on 14.03.2024 by the Chief Engineer, PWD Roads, Assam for improvement and upgradation of the Sarthebari–Nagaon road (Ch. 0.000 Km to Ch. 14.420 Km) under Asom Mala 2.0, Package No. AsomMala2.0/Barpeta/01, for Rs. 40,04,49,870/-. After completing about 30% of the work, the petitioner was allegedly told verbally by respondent No. 4 (Executive Engineer) that Forest Royalty would be deducted from its running bills. Relying on Trinayan Associates (M/S) & Anr. v. State of Assam, (2017) 2 GLT 859 and State of Assam v. Muslim Ali (Md.), (2013) 2 GLT 945, the petitioner contended that the PWD cannot deduct Forest Royalty under the Assam Minor Minerals Rules, 2013 absent a clause to that effect in the agreement; its representation dated 28.03.2024 to respondent No. 4 remained undecided. The Standing Counsel, PWD, had no objection to the prayer. The Court disposed of the writ petition directing respondent No. 4 to take a decision on the representation dated 28.03.2024 within one month of receipt of a certified copy of the order, leaving the merits of the royalty question open.

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010041602025

2025:GAU-AS:2662

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

Case No. : WP(C)/1236/2025

M/S MACROCOSM BUILDERS

REPRESENTED BY SRI DEBADIB DAS, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O- LATE PRAMOD CH. DAS, R/O- BILOORTARIHATI, WARD NO.-2, BARPETA TOWN, PO AND PS- BARPETA, DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (R), DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS ROAD DEPARMENT (ROADS) ASSAM GUWAHATI-3.

3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS) BARPETA ROAD CIRCLE BARPETA

4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS ROAD DEPARTMENT (ROADS) BARPETA MANDIA AND CHENGA TERRITORIAL ROAD DIVISION BARPETA ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P J SAIKIA, MS D DUTTA,B BURAGOHAIN

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PWD,

Page No.# 2/3

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR

ORDER

Date : 13.03.2025

Heard Mr. P. J. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, PWD, for all the respondents.

2. The petitioner’s Firm was given a Notice to proceed with the work on 14.03.2024 by the Chief Engineer, PWD Roads, Assam, in respect of Improvement and Upgradation of Roads from Sarthebari to Nagaon from Ch. 0.000 Km (sarthebari) to Ch. 14.420 Km (nagaon) under Asom Mala 2.0 for the year 2023-24 under Package No – AsomMala2.0/Barpeta/01 for an amount of Rs.40,04,49,870/- (Rupees Forty Crore Four Lakh Forty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy Only).

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner’s Firm submits that the petitioner had completed approximately 30% of the contract work till the month of April, 2024. However, when the petitioner went to submit his running bill, the petitioner was verbally informed by the respondent No. 4/Executive Engineer, Publics Works Department (Roads), Barpeta, Mandia & Chenga Territorial Road Division, Barpeta Assam that Forest Royalty would be deducted from the running bills of the petitioner.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that in terms of the Judgment passed in the case of Trinayan Associates (M/S) & Anr. Vs. State of Assam reported in 2017 2 GLT 859 as well as in the case of State of Assam and Ors. Vs. Muslim Ali (Md.) reported in 2013 2 GLT 945, the PWD cannot deduct Forest Royalty under the Assam Minor Minerals Rules, 2013 unless there is a clause to that effect in the agreement executed between the petitioner and the PWD. It is the further

Page No.# 3/3

case of the petitioner that the petitioner has submitted a representation before the respondent No. 4 on 28.03.2024 not to deduct the Forest Royalty from the running bills of the petitioner. However, till date the representation dated 28.03.2024 has not been considered by the respondent No. 4.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, accordingly, submits that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondent No. 4 to take a decision on the petitioner’s representation dated 28.03.2024 within a specified period of time.

6. Ms. S. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, PWD, appearing on behalf of all the respondents has no objection to the prayer made by the petitioner’s counsel.

7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 4 to take a decision on the representation dated 28.03.2024, made by the petitioner within a period of 1 (one) month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Court’s order.

8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant