Disposed

Rajendra Choudhury v. the District Commissioner and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC7 Sept 2025WP(C)/5896/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contractor sought refund of Rs. 4 lakh deposited as advance forest royalty for permits to carry boulders for an allotted road-protection work. Respondents did not dispute the claim. Court directed authorities to verify the claim and refund the amount with applicable taxes and charges within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to verify the claim and refund Rs. 4,00,000 with applicable taxes and charges within three months if entitlement is established.

Rajendra Choudhury Vs the District… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Gauhati HC (2025)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010225262023

2025:GAU-AS:12178

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/5896/2023

¶6

RAJENDRA CHOUDHURY

¶7

S/O- LATE MONILAL CHOUDHURY, TANGLA TOWN WARD NO.3, P.O. AND P.S. TANGLA, ASSAM, CONTACT- 7002721580/9435184224

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER AND 4 ORS. UDALGURI DISTRICT, BODOLAND TERRITORIAL REGION, ASSAM

¶10

2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL KOKRAJHAR ASSAM

¶11

3:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER DHANSIRI FOREST DIVISION UDALGURI DISTRICT UDALGURI ASSAM

¶12

4:TREASURY OFFICER UDALGURI ASSAM

¶13

5:EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (R AND B) UDALGURI DISTRICT UDALGURI ASSA

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D K DAS, MR C KUMAR,MR. R K AGARWALA,MR H BETALA

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FOREST,SC, FINANCE,SC, PWD,SC, BTC

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Date : 08-09-2025

¶20

Heard Mr. DK Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. RK Mushahary, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 5, Mr. A Chaliha, learned, Standing Counsel, Finance Department appearing for respondent No. 4 as well as Mr. SR Baruah, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent No. 1.

¶21

By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to refund an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- along with applicable taxes and charges paid by the petitioner as advance forest royalty for issuance of forest permit for carrying boulders/forest materials for construction work allotted to the petitioner at Udalguri (R&B) Division.

¶22

The petitioner was allotted the work for “Protection work on both sides of Tangla-Dimakuchi road in the form of Boulder protection and RCC retaining wall under SOPD-G”. The petitioner was instructed to deposit Rs. 4,00,000/- as royalty for issue of forest permit. Accordingly, the petitioner deposited the required total amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- on different dates.

¶23

Mr. DK Das, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the work awarded has been executed to the satisfaction of the concerned authorities and since the petitioner has completed the work by paying the required advance forest royalty, the respondent authorities are incumbent upon to refund the

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- along with applicable taxes and charges which was paid as royalty for issuance of forest permit. However, despite repeated applications, the respondent authorities have failed to refund the said amount and therefore, he submits that respondent authorities may be directed to refund the same to the petitioner.

¶26

RK Mushahary, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 5 as well as Mr. SR Baruah, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent No. 1 have submitted that since the amount claimed by the petitioner is not disputed, the respondent authorities may be directed to refund the same as may be permissible.

¶27

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, this Court deems it proper to direct the respondent authorities to verify the claim of the petitioner and after verification if it is found that the petitioner is entitled for refund of Rs. 4,00,000/- along with applicable taxes and charges, same be refunded to him. It is accordingly ordered. The entire exercise so directed hereinabove shall be completed within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶28

Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

Rajendra Choudhury v. the District Commissioner and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Choudhury v. the District Commissioner and 4 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

Md. Kamruzaman Khan and 7 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

The Gauhati Mazdoor Co-Operative Society Ltd. Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Employees Provident Fund Organisation and Anr. Vs Shri Mohan Teron

Sunil Ch Dey Vs Prodip Timung, Acs and 2 Ors.

Hemo Saikia and 5 Ors. Vs State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Pabitra Boro Vs the District Commissioner and 4 Ors.