Mainul Ali Vs the Guwahati Municipal Corporation and 3 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/7

¶2

GAHC010127562024

¶3

2025:GAU-AS:6085

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/3427/2024

¶6

MAINUL ALI S/O- MABHU ALI, R/O- AGGATHURI, P.O.- DADARA, P.S.- HAJO, DIST.- KAMRUP, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS COMMISSIONER, BHANGAGARH, GUWAHATI, ASSAM- 781005.

¶9

2:THE COMMISSIONER THE GAUHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI ASSAM- 781005.

¶10

3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI ASSAM- 781005.

¶11

4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION JANXALA BRANCH BASISTHA

¶12

Page No.# 2/7

¶13

GUWAHATI ASSAM

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S BORTHAKUR, MR. D GOGOI

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, GMC,

¶16

Linked Case : WP(C)/1176/2025

¶17

MAINUL ALI S/O- MABHU ALI R/O- AGGATHURI P.O.- DADARA P.S.- HAJO DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM VERSUS

¶18

THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS COMMISSIONER BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI ASSAM-781005 2:THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN-781005 3:THE COMMISSIONER THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN-781005

¶19

4:THE CHIEF ENGINEER

¶20

Page No.# 3/7

¶21

THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN-781005

¶22

5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION JANXALA BRANCH GUWAHATI ASSAM

¶23

-----------Advocate for : MR PARAM HANGKHA KONWAR Advocate for : SC

¶24

GMC appearing for THE GUWAHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND 4 ORS

¶25

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Date : 16-05-2025

¶28

Heard Mr. D Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S Bora, learned Standing Counsel, Guwahati Municipal Corporation (GMC).

¶29

2. The petitioner’s case is that the dues payable to him for the use of his dumpers, on the basis of the rates fixed by the GMC, vide Orders dated 26.05.2022 and 26.08.2022, has not been paid to the petitioner.

¶30

3. The petitioner’s counsel submits that in terms of the Work Orders dated 26.05.2022 and 26.08.2022 issued to the petitioner by the Commissioner, GMC, the petitioner’s dumpers having 8.5 capacity were hired @ Rs.11,400/- per day for conservancy work. The petitioner having used his dumpers having 8.5 capacity for disposal of garbage, as directed by the GMC and as per the GMC rates, had submitted his bills, in terms of the above Orders. However, the GMC authorities have constituted a committee, who have

¶31

Page No.# 4/7

¶32

taken a decision to pay to the petitioner @ Rs.6,000/- per day and not Rs.11,400/- per day, for the use of his dumpers having 8.5 capacity.

¶33

4. The petitioner’s counsel submits that as the GMC have hired the petitioner’s dumpers @ Rs.11,400/- per day, the GMC cannot now decline to give the bills of the petitioner as per the rates fixed by them, in terms of the Orders dated 26.05.2022 and 26.08.2022. He submits that in a similar matter, i.e. WP(C) 2033/2023, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court had held that when the rates payable for the use of a dumper had been fixed by the GMC, the GMC could not turn around and take a different stand, regarding the rates for payment for the use of the dumpers. The co-ordinate Bench had accordingly directed the GMC to pay the petitioner in WP(C) 2033/2023, the rates earlier fixed by the GMC for use of the dumpers.

¶34

5. Mr. S Bora, learned Standing Counsel, GMC submits that the decision to pay to the petitioner Rs.6,000/- per day instead of Rs.11,400/- per day had been done, pursuant to a meeting dated 06.12.2024 of a Committee constituted by the GMC, wherein it was reflected that as other persons had been charging much lower rates for use of their dumpers, which was Rs.6,000/- per day, the petitioner should also be paid Rs.6,000/- per day for use of his dumpers.

¶35

6. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶36

7. The Orders dated 26.05.2022 and 26.08.2022 issued by the Commissioner, GMC to the petitioner are reproduced herein below as follows:-

¶37

“ Order dated 26.05.2022

¶38

Sub: Hiring of Dumper for conservancy work of GMC.

¶39

Sir,

¶40

Page No.# 5/7

¶41

With reference to the subject cited above, please find herewith the order for supply of vehicles/machineries on hire basis to Guwahati Municipal Corporation at the approved rate as shown below:

¶42

Sl. No	Particulars of	Rate per day (in	Quantity
	machinery/vehicles	Rs.)
1	Dumper 8.5 capacity	11,400.00	10 nos.(Ten)

¶43

Terms and conditions:-

¶44

The detailement of vehicles will be as per the terms and conditions of the tender.

¶45

A log book for recording of daily work shall have to be maintained. The log book shall have to be submitted with hire charge bill per month basis. The log book must be signed by the Engineer concern or authorized supervisor daily.

¶46

As the above rates are inclusive of POL. Cost of POL issued will be deducted from your bill as per actual consumption.

¶47

The vehicles/machineries are hired w.e.f. 14.04.2022.

¶48

GMC will not take any responsibility for any accident etc. during operation of the vehicles/machineries.”

¶49

“ Order dated 26.08.2022

¶50

Sub: Hiring of Dumper for conservancy work of GMC.

¶51

Ref: The order no. GGR/326/2022/3985 dated 26.05.2022.

¶52

Sir,

¶53

With reference to the subject cited above, please find herewith the order for supply of vehicles/machineries on hire basis to Guwahati Municipal

¶54

Page No.# 6/7

¶55

Corporation at the approved rate as shown below:

¶56

Sl. No	Particulars of	Rate per day (in	Quantity
	machinery/vehicles	Rs.)
1	Dumper 8.5 capacity	11,400.00	2 nos.(Two)
2	Excavator(JCB 4DX/3DX)	12,500.00	1 no.(One)

¶57

Terms and conditions:-

¶58

The detailement of vehicles will be as per the terms and conditions as mentioned in the order under reference.

¶59

A log book for recording of daily work shall have to be maintained. The log book shall have to be submitted with hire charge bill per month basis. The log book must be signed by the Engineer concern or authorized supervisor daily.

¶60

As the above rates are inclusive of POL. Cost of POL issued will be deducted from your bill as per actual consumption.

¶61

The vehicles/machineries are hired w.e.f. 19.08.2022.

¶62

GMC will not take any responsibility for any accident etc. during operation of the vehicles/machineries.”

¶63

8. The above Orders clearly show that the petitioner’s dumpers having 8.5 capacity had been hired by the GMC @ Rs.11,400/- per day. As the petitioner’s dumpers had been utilised at the above rates, the respondents cannot now turn around and take a stand that the petitioner would be paid only Rs.6,000/- per day. Further, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court had, vide order dated 04.10.2023 passed in WP(C) 2033/2023 (Sarat Deka vs. The Guwahati Municipal Corporation & 4 Ors.), directed the GMC to pay to the petitioner therein the rates fixed for use of dumpers.

¶64

Page No.# 7/7

¶65

9. In view of the reasons stated above, this Court finds that the respondents would have to pay the petitioner his bills for use of his dumpers @ Rs.11,400/- per day. The bills of the petitioner should accordingly be paid within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Consequently, the impugned meeting minutes dated 06.12.2024 passed by the Committee is set aside.

¶66

10. The writ petitions are accordingly allowed.

¶67

JUDGE

¶68

Comparing Assistant

Mainul Ali v. the Guwahati Municipal Corporation and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mainul Ali v. the Guwahati Municipal Corporation and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Vardan Associates Private Limited Vs Numaligarh Refinery Limited and 7 Ors.

M/S Down Town Hospital Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Urrunaband Tea Estate Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Bidur Chandra Ray Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Bidur Chandra Ray Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Mainul Ali Vs the Guwahati Municipal Corporation and 4 Ors.