Disposed¶31

Nurjamal Sheikh v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC7 Dec 2025WP(C)/4769/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Unpaid contractor dues; PWD/BTC Kokrajhar; work order verification; completion certificate dated 15.02.2022; Rs.33,39,000/-; restoration of RCC Br.No.1/1 approaches at Joldoba; Kokrajhar Rural Roads Division 2021-22; payment in terms of Full Bench judgment; Tamsher Ali v. State of Assam 2008 (4) GLT 1; respondent Nos.5-7; one-month verification deadline; WP(C)/4769/2025; 2025:GAU-AS:16927; Justice Devashis Baruah; disposed with directions 08.12.2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions to respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7 to verify the petitioner's entitlement on the basis of the work order and completion of work, and, if entitlement is found, to pay the amount in terms with the Full Bench judgment in Tamsher Ali (2008 (4) GLT 1); verification within 1 month of service of certified copy of the order on respondent No.4.

Nurjamal Sheikh Vs the State of Assam — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner completed the contracted work in accordance with the work order and what exact amount he is entitled to (dues claimed at Rs.33,39,000/-), to be verified by the respondent authorities. +1 more

¶29

Court's answer

This Court held that the interest of justice would be met by directing the respondent authorities to verify whether the petitioner completed the work per the work order and to ascertain the exact amount to which he is entitled, if any.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

Respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7 were specifically directed to verify the petitioner's entitlement on the basis of the work order issued in his favour and whether he had completed the work in question.

¶30

Key takeaways

If, after verification, the petitioner is found entitled to any amount, the same is to be paid to him in terms with the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in Tamsher Ali and Others v. State of Assam and others, 2008 (4) GLT 1.ratio¶30
The verification is to be completed within one month from the date a certified copy of the order is served upon respondent No.4, with payment thereafter in terms of the Tamsher Ali judgment.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WP(C)/4769/2025, Gauhati High Court (Devashis Baruah J., order dated 08.12.2025): A contractor (Nurjamal Sheikh) claimed unpaid dues of Rs.33,39,000/- for completed restoration of both approaches of RCC Br.No.1/1 on Joldoba (Chief Minister's visit route, Kokrajhar Rural Roads Division, 2021-22), for which a completion certificate dated 15.02.2022 had been issued; representations for release went unanswered. The Court did not itself adjudicate entitlement; it disposed of the petition, directing respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7 to verify completion of the work against the work order and ascertain the exact entitlement, and, if any amount is found payable, to pay it in terms with the Full Bench judgment in Tamsher Ali and Others v. State of Assam and others, 2008 (4) GLT 1. Verification to be completed within one month of service of a certified copy of the order on respondent No.4, payment thereafter in terms of the said Full Bench judgment.

Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010179502025

2025:GAU-AS:16927

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/4769/2025

¶6

NURJAMAL SHEIKH

¶7

S/O- FAYEZUDDIN SHEIKH, VILL- RAJAPARA PART I, P.O AND P.SBAGRIBARI, DIST- KOKRAJHAR, BTC ASSAM, PIN-783349,

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶10

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PWRD (WORKS) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06

¶11

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06

¶12

3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PWD (ROADS) ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-03

¶13

4:THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY BTC KOKRAJHAR ASSAM PIN-783370

¶14

5:THE SECRETARY PWD BTC KOKRAJHAR ASSAM PIN-783370

¶15

Page No.# 2/5

¶16

6:THE ADDL. CHIEF ENGINEER CUM DIRECTOR PWD BTC KOKRAJHAR ASSAM PIN-783370 7:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PWD (R AND B) CIRCLE BTC KOKRAJHAR ASSAM PIN-783370 8:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD KOKRAJHAR RURAL ROAD DIVISION KOKRAJHAR BTC ASSAM . PIN-783370 9:THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD GOSSAIGAON RURAL ROAD SUB-DIVISION KOKRAJHAR BTC ASSAM . PIN-783360 10:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KOKRAJHAR BTC ASSAM . PIN-78337

¶17

Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. HR Ahmed Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. NR Sarma, Standing Counsel, BTC Mr. B Gogoi Addl. AG, Assam

¶18

Page No.# 3/5

¶19

B E F O R E

¶20

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

¶21

ORDER

¶22

08.12.2025

¶23

The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in not making payment of the amount to which the petitioner is entitled to upon completion of the contractual work allotted to him by the respondent authorities.

¶24

The case of the petitioner herein is that he had completed the work i.e. “Immediate restoration of both approaches of RCC Br.No.1/1 on Joldoba in connection of visit of the Chief Minister of Assam to Mahamaya Mandir and Tamarhat on 13.10.2021 under Kokrajhar Rural Roads Division for the year 2021-22”. The petitioner thereafter on completion of the work submitted a bill of an amount of Rs.33,39,000/-. However, the said payment had not been made to the petitioner till date, for which, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the instant writ petition.

¶25

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had successfully completed the work to the satisfaction of the respondent authorities. In that regard, the respondent authorities had also issued completion certificate dated 15.02.2022. In spite of the same, the petitioner has not been paid his dues. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had made several representations before the respondent authorities for release of the said amount, however, the amount of Rs.33,39,000/- is still pending.

¶26

Mr. NR Sarma, the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of

¶27

Page No.# 4/5

¶28

the BTC submits that as to whether the petitioner has completed the work in question is a subject matter of verification which needs to be carried out by the respondent authorities and it is only on the basis of such verification, the actual entitlement of the petitioner can be ascertained.

¶29

Upon hearing the learned counsels for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be met if a direction is given to the respondent authorities to verify as to whether the petitioner has completed the work in accordance with the work order mentioned hereinabove and thereupon to ascertain the exact amount to which the petitioner is entitled to, if any.

¶30

It is under such circumstances, this Court, therefore, disposes of the instant writ petition thereby directing the respondent authorities, more particularly, the respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7 to verify the entitlement of the petitioner on the basis of the work order which were issued in favour of the petitioner and as to whether the petitioner had completed the work in question and thereupon, after verification, if it is found that the petitioner is entitled to any amount, the same should be paid to the petitioner 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. 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 the respondent No.4 and the payment thereupon be made in terms with the judgment rendered in the case of Tamsher Ali (supra).

¶31

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

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Page No.# 5/5

¶34

Comparing Assistant

Nurjamal Sheikh v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nurjamal Sheikh v. the State of Assam

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

Sri Anwar Hussain Ahmed Vs Sri Narayan Das

Kosiron Nessa Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Chan Mahmud @ Chanmamud Ali Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Sabura Khatun Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Nurjamal Sheikh Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Pradip Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.