Disposed¶33

Abinash Balmiki and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC15 Jul 2026WP(C)/213/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contractual dues; writ court limited scope of interference; disputed questions of facts; acknowledgement of liability in writing by Chief Engineer/Head of Department; Full Bench principles Tamsher Ali vs. State of Assam 2008 (4) GLT 1; disposal at admissions stage; affidavit admission of liability by District Commissioner Kokrajhar; Bodoland Territorial Council; logistic support to Army/CAPF Counter Insurgency Operations; release of balance amount; Gauhati High Court; WP(C)/213/2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of at the admissions stage with a direction to release the balance amount of contractual dues to the petitioner expeditiously and in accordance with law, following the principles laid down in Tamser Ali (supra). ¶33

Abinash Balmiki and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the Writ Court can direct release of the contractual dues (Rs.90,63,697/-) claimed by the petitioners, given the limited scope of interference in contractual dues claims, where the liability stands admitted in the affidavit of respondent no. 4.

¶22

Court's answer

The scope of interference by a Writ Court in claims for contractual dues is limited as such claims constitute disputed questions of facts; however, per the Full Bench principles in Tamsher Ali vs. State of Assam, 2008 (4) GLT 1, a Writ Court can issue directions where there is an acknowledgement in writing of the liability by the Chief Engineer/Head of the Department.

¶6

Ratio / Principle

Since respondent no. 4 admitted the liability in its affidavit, the Court directed that the balance amount be released to the petitioner by following the principles laid down in Tamser Ali (supra), expeditiously and in accordance with law.

¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Sanjay Kumar Medhi, J.), WP(C)/213/2025, order dated 16.07.2026: Writ petition by the proprietor of M/s A.B. Enterprise seeking release of contractual dues of Rs.90,63,697/- for completed works (including supply/logistic support to Army/CAPF in Kokrajhar) disposed of at the admissions stage. Respondent no. 4 (District Commissioner, Kokrajhar) admitted the liability in its affidavit, the amount forming part of a total fund requirement of Rs.2,15,30,946/- proposed for three firms. Holding that the scope of interference by a Writ Court in contractual dues claims is limited as they constitute disputed questions of facts, but that directions can issue where there is an acknowledgement in writing of the liability by the Chief Engineer/Head of the Department (Full Bench principles in Tamsher Ali vs. State of Assam, 2008 (4) GLT 1), the Court directed release of the balance amount to the petitioner expeditiously and in accordance with law.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010004342025

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/213/2025

¶6

ABINASH BALMIKI AND ANR PROPRIETOR OF M/S A.B. ENTERPRISE, S/O- BRIJMOHAN BALMAKI, R/O- SANTINAGAR, PATHARGHAT, WARD NO. 2, KOKRAJHAR, P.O.- KOKRAJHAR, DIST.- KOKARJHAR, BTR, ASSAM. PIN- 783370.

¶7

2: M/S A.B. ENTERPRISE A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI ABHINASH BALMIKI

¶8

ADDRESS- WARD NO. 2 PATHARGHAR P.O.- KOKRAJHAR DIST.- KOKRAJHAR

¶9

BTR ASSAM PIN- 783370

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006.

¶12

2:THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

BODOFA NWGWR KOKRAJHAR (BTR) ASSAM PIN- 783370. 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI. PIN- 781006. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KOKRAJHAR BTR ASSAM PIN- 783370. 5:THE ADDL. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE KOKRAJHAR BTR ASSAM PIN- 783370

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B J MUKHERJEE, MS R SAHA

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FINANCE DEPTT.,SC, BTC

¶17

BEFORE

¶18

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

¶19

ORDER

¶20

16.07.2026

¶21

Heard Shri B.J. Mukherjee, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Shri G.Bokolial, learned State Counsel and Shri A. Atreya, learned Standing Counsel for the BTC.

¶22

Considering the subject matter and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admissions stage. The issue is with regard to a claim for release of contractual dues.

¶23

Page No.# 3/4

¶24

As per the facts projected, the petitionerno. 1 is the proprietor of the petitionerno. 2 and is a Contractor, who was awarded several works including supply works.It is claimed that the works were duly completed and a bill was raised of Rs.90,63,697/-(Rupees Ninety Lakhs SixtyThree Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Seven) only which was not paid and accordingly, the instant writ petition was filed.

¶25

In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no. 4, the amount however has been admitted.

¶26

Shri Mukherjee, the learned counsel for the petitioners has also informed this Court that in the meantime certain amounts have been released.

¶27

The scope of interference by a Writ Court in claims for contractual dues is limited as it constitutes disputed questions of facts.However, the Hon’bleFull Bench in the case of Tamsher Ali vs. State of Assam reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1 has laid down certain principles wherein a Writ Court can issue directions and one amongst the principles is an acknowledgement in writing of the liability by the Chief Engineer/Head of the Department.

¶28

In the instant case, in the affidavit filed by the respondentno. 4, there is an admission of the liability. For ready reference, the relevant averments are made in paragraph 3 of the affidavit which is extracted herein below:

¶29

“That the deponent begs to states that the proposal for requirement of fund of Rs.2,15,30,946/- (Rupees two crore fifteen lakh thirty thousand nine hundred forty-six) only against 3nos. of firms/contractor namely (1) M/S A.B. Enterprise, Kokrajhar (Rs. 90,63,697/-) (2) Sukumar Saha, Bilasipara (Rs.1,71,513/-) and (3) M/S Mazumdar Enterprise, Kokrajhar (Rs. 1,22,95,736/-) as per Government prescribed format for providing logistic support to Army/ CAPF deployed for

¶30

Page No.# 4/4

¶31

Counter Insurgency Operations in Kokrajhar District as sought by the Government. The head-wise details are given below:

¶32

Sl.No.	Particulars	PendingLiabilities(in Rs.)
1.	Generator Hire Charge	16,97,475.00
2	Material Supply	1,98,33,471.00
Total		2,15,30,946.00

¶33

In view of the above position, this Court directs that so far as the balance amount is concerned, the same be released to the petitioner by following the principles laid down in the case of Tamser Ali (supra).Such release be made expeditiously and in accordance with law.

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

Abinash Balmiki and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abinash Balmiki and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 4 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

Bardamal Gpss Ltd. and 22 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Mazaharul Hoque Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Smt. Runu Hazarika Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Icco Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and Othrs

Babu Sarma Vs the Government of Assam and 3 Ors.

Icco Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and Ors.