Smti Pranati Debnath Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Gauhati HC (2026)

Smti Pranati Debnath Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction for release of the contractual bills in accordance with the Full Bench principles, requiring placement of the petitioner in the chronological list as per seniority, the exercise to be completed expeditiously and preferably within six months from receipt of a certified copy of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether a claim for payment of contractual bills (hire charges for the petitioner's vehicles) is entertainable by a Writ Court and whether a direction for release of the outstanding dues should issue.

Court's answer

The petitioner is entitled to a direction for release of the contractual bills in accordance with the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Full Bench (Tamsher Ali), which requires placing the petitioner in the chronological list as per seniority; the exercise is to be completed expeditiously, preferably within six months from receipt of a certified copy of the order.

Ratio / Principle

In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by respondent no. 7 on 15.06.2026, an admission of liability was made to the extent of Rs.30,68,072/-, satisfying the 'admitted dues' condition for entertainability under the Full Bench principles.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court, WP(C)/276/2026, order dated 13.07.2026 (Sanjay Kumar Medhi, J.), disposed at the admission stage. The petitioner, registered owner of vehicles Regn. Nos. AS-16-G-3637 (M/Thar), AS-16-F-5419 (Scorpio) and AS-16G-1025 (Bolero), sought release of hire bills of Rs.33,80,376/- raised for vehicles hired by State respondents between 2021 and 2024. The State had already paid Rs.2,35,256/- and, in the affidavit-in-opposition of respondent no. 7 dated 15.06.2026, admitted Rs.30,68,072/- as due (after correcting per diem rates and deducting Rs.77,048/-). On the entertainability of contractual-bill claims by a Writ Court, the Court relied on the Full Bench decision in Tamsher Ali vs. State of Assam, 2008 (4) GLT 1, endorsing the Jatin Pathak principles (which draw on State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. BhailalBhai, AIR 1964 SC 1006, on measuring delay under Article 226 by analogy with the Limitation Act): admitted dues are entertainable if lodged within three years. Holding the claim admitted to the extent of Rs.30,68,072/-, the Court directed release of the contractual bills in accordance with the Full Bench principles, requiring placement of the petitioner in the chronological list as per seniority, to be completed preferably within six months of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010273772025

undefined

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

Case No. : WP(C)/276/2026

SMTI PRANATI DEBNATH

W/O- RATAN CH. NATH DAS, RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 3, BIDHANPALLY, P.O. KOKRAJHAR, P.S. AND DIST. KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 783370.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.

2:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 3:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM STATE HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 4:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM B.K. KAKATY ROAD ULUBARI GUWAHATI-7. 5:THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (ADMN) ASSAM B.K. KAKOTY ROAD ULUBARI GUWAHATI-7. 6:THE ADDITIONAL INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (ADMN) ASSAM B.K. KAKOTY ROAD

Page No.# 2/4

ULUBARI GUWAHATI-7. 7:THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE GUWAHATI ASSAM 8:THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE-CUM- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP METRO (LAW AND ORDER) DIST. KAMRUP METRO ASSAM 9:THE MOTOR TRANSPORT OFFICER (M.T.O) KAMRUP METRO ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J I BORBHUIYA, MR. N ALI,MR A HOSSAIN

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM,

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

ORDER

13.07.2026

Heard Shri J.I. Borbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri M. Chetia, learned State Counsel.Considering the subject matter involved and the stand of the respondents in the affidavits, the instant writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage.

As per the facts projected, the petitioner is the registered owner of vehicles bearing registration nos. AS-16-G-3637 (M/Thar), AS-16-F-5419 (Scorpio) and AS-16G-1025 (Bolero).The said vehicles were hired by the respondentsin the period 2021 to 2024 for which bills were raised amounting to Rs.33,80,376/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakh Eighty Thousand Three Hundred Seventy Six) only.However,the same were not

Page No.# 3/4

released and accordingly, the writ petition has been filed.

Shri Borbhuiya, the learned counsel has submitted that the amount involved is legally entitled to by the petitioner and therefore, a direction be issued in this regard.

Shri Chetia, the learned State Counsel has however submitted that out of the aforesaid amount, an amount of Rs.2,35,256/-(Rupees Two Lakh Thirty Five Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Six) onlyhas already been paid to the petitioner. He has also submitted that on verification, it has been found that presently an amount of Rs.30,68,072/- (Rupees Thirty Lakh Sixty Eight Thousand Seventy Two) onlyis found due.

On the issue of a claim of contractual bills to be entertained by a Writ Court, the Hon’ble Full Bench in the case of Tamsher Ali vs. State of Assam reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1 has endorsed the principles laid down in the earlier case of Jatin Pathak :

"i) All claims for payment of outstanding dues would be entertained for consideration provided the same are admitted by the respective departments. The admissions of liability shall have to be certified by the respective Chief Engineer in respect of Works Departments and in respect of other departments by the Head of the departments.

ii) All claims for payment of admitted outstanding dues would be entertained for payment provided the claims are lodged before the competent authority within a period of three years from the date of the payment becoming due.

iii) All claims for payment of admitted outstanding dues in respect of which the contractors intend or have approached the Hon'ble Court, in such cases, the contractors must approach the Hon'ble High Court within a period of 3 years from the date of the payment becoming due. This view has been taken as the Hon'ble Apex Court in the State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. BhailalBhai and Ors. reported in AIR 1964 SC 1006 at Para 21 has observed that though provisions of Limitation Act do not as such apply to proceedings under Article 226, the period of Limitation prescribed by Limitation Act for instituting a civil action may ordinarily be taken to be a reasonable standard by which delay in seeking remedy under Article 226 can be measured. "

In the instant case, it is seen that in the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no. 7 on 15.06.2026, an admission has been made to the extent of an

Page No.# 4/4

amount of Rs.30,68,072/-(Rupees Thirty Lakh Sixty Eight Thousand Seventy Two) only.For ready reference, the relevant pleadings are extracted herein below:

“(ii) Scrutiny of the bills further, reveals that petitioner in violation of the per diem rate fixed by the Govt. of Assam, Transport Department has claimed per diem rate as Rs.1450/- (Rupees One Thousand Four Hundred Fifty) only instead of Rs.990/- (Rupees Nine Hundred Ninety) only. Accordingly, the remaining 19 (nineteen) No’s of bills were re-examined and corrected by deducting the excess forwarded to the sanctioning authority to accord Financial Sanction of Rs.30,68,072/- (Rupees Thirty Lakh Sixty Eight Thousand Seventy Two) only in 2 (two) proposals. As a result of the corrections in few bills an amount of Rs.77,048/- (Rupees Seventy Seven Thousand Forty Eight) only have been deducted. Therefore, the petitioner should be entitled an amount of Rs.30,68,072/- (Rupees Thirty Lakh Sixty Eight Thousand Seventy Two). The details of the proposals showing bills are as follows:-

...”

Considering the above, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to a direction for release of the contractual bills in accordance with the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Full Bench which would require placing of the petitioner in the chronological list as per seniority.Let such exercise be undertaken and completed expeditiously and preferably within a period of 6 (six) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

Writ petition stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant