VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Gauhati High Court 2024 › High Court of Gauhati

Samsul Talukdar v. The State of Assam and 5 Ors

Disposed Of
Court
High Court of Gauhati
Decided
18 April 2024
Bench
Kalyan Rai Suranaauthor
Case no.
WP(C) 3957/2022

Judgment

ORDER Date : 19-04-2024 Heard Mr. MH Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. U Das, learned Govt. Advocate appears for the respondent nos.1 and 3; Mr. AI Ali, learned standing counsel for the Election Commission of India representing respondent no.2 and Mr. RR Gogoi, learned standing counsel for the PHE representing respondent nos.4, 5 and 6.

¶2The petitioner claims that being a successful bidder, he was given two work orders vide letter nos.PHEE/BAR/Misc.1/2016-17/1425 and PHEE/BAR/Misc.1/2016-17/1429.

¶3It is projected that the work orders were issued after administrative approval from the District Administration and the said work was for the earlier Assembly Election, 2016. It is projected that after completion of the works, the petitioner has raised his bill for the said work which has not been paid.

¶4Although notice was issued by order dated 15.06.2022, till date no response has been filed by the respondents and they have not denied that the petitioner has not done the work.

¶5Accordingly, in absence of any response, the present writ petition is allowed by directing the Chief Engineer, PHE Department, Govt. of Assam Page No.# 3/3 (respondent no.4) to verify through his officers as to whether the petitioner has done the work as per the contract of the work orders which shall be carried out within a period of 1(one) month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order and if the petitioner is found entitled to the contractual bills for the work done, such payment shall be released within a period of 3(three) months thereafter.

¶6The petitioner shall produce a certified copy of this order before the Chief Engineer, PHE Department, Govt. of Assam (respondent no.4).

¶7The writ petition stands allowed to the extent as indicated above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Case details

Parties and counsel

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010109592022 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/3957/2022o SAMSULoTALUKDARo S/O-oABDULoAWALoTALUKDAR,oVILL-oBARoAGDIA,oP.O.-oNAGAON,oP.S.-o BARPETA,oDIST.oBARPETA,oASSAM. VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo5oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCHIEFoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVERNMENToOFo ASSAM,oDISPUR,oGUWAHATI-06. 2:THEoCHIEFoELECTORALoOFFICER oASSAM oDISPUR oGUWAHATI-06. 3:THEoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONER-CUM-DISTRICToELECTIONoOFFICER oBARPETAoDISTRICT oP.O.-oBARPETA oASSAM. 4:THEoCHIEFoENGINEERoOFoPUBLICoHEALTHo(ENGINEER) oDEPARTMENT oASSAMoDISPUR oGUWAHATI-06. 5:THEoEXECUTIVEoENGINEERoOFoPUBLICoHEALTHoENGINEERING oBARPETAoDIVISION oBARPETA. 6:ASSTT.oEXECUTIVEoENGINEERoOFoPUBLICoHEALTHoENGINEERING oBARPETAoSUBoDIVISION oBARPETAo Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M H AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.