Gauhati High Court
Cont.Cas(C)/326/2026 of DHARMENDRA BORA, Vs SHRI DIGANTA BORAH, IPS AND ORS on 6 October 2026
GAHC010112772026 2026:GAU-AS:15111 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/326/2026 DHARMENDRA BORA, S/O LATE JATIN BORA, R/O - H.B. ROAD, MACKHOWA, P.O. P.S.- BHARALUMUKH,GUWAHATI -781009,DISTRICT- KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM VERSUS
GAHC010112772026
2026:GAU-AS:15111
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/326/2026
DHARMENDRA BORA,
S/O LATE JATIN BORA,
R/O - H.B. ROAD, MACKHOWA,
P.O. P.S.- BHARALUMUKH,GUWAHATI -781009,DISTRICT- KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM
VERSUS
SHRI DIGANTA BORAH, IPS AND ORS
COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HOME
DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006.
2:SHRI JAYANT NARLIKAR
IAS
COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781006.
3:SHRI HARMEET SINGH
IPS
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
ASSAM
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI-781007.
4:PARTHA SARATHI MAHANTA
IPS
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
ASSAM
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI-781007
5:TAPAN KONWAR
THE MOTOR TRANSPORT OFFICER (MTO)
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
ASSAM
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI-781007.
6:MR. DHANJIT KALITA
THE MOTOR TRANSPORT OFFICER (MTO)
POLICE RESERVE PANBAZAR
GUWAHATI
DIST.- KAMRUP(M)
ASSAM
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. Das, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Nath, Sr. Govt. Advocate Mr. A. Chaliha, Advocate
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 07.10.2026
This is an application filed alleging willful and deliberate violation of the order dated 17.09.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 2542/2025 whereby this Court had passed the following directions as contained at paragraph No. 5 of the said order. The said paragraph is reproduced hereinbelow:
“5. This Court, therefore, disposes of the instant writ petition with the following observations and directions:-
i) The Respondent Authorities shall verify as to whether the vehicle i.e. Mahindra Thar CRDE bearing Registration No.AS-01-EE-5011 was taken on hire by the respondent authorities on daily rent basis at Rs.990/- per day and Rs.200/- as driver’s allowances.
ii) The Respondent Authorities shall also verify as to whether the petitioner had submitted the requisite bills/documents which are required for the purpose of releasing the outstanding amount as claimed by the petitioner.
iii) The Respondent Authorities shall also verify the entitlement of the petitioner to the outstanding dues, and if upon verification in the manner stated above, it is found that the petitioner is entitled to any such amount, the Respondent Authorities shall pay the same to the petitioner.
iv) The above exercise be completed within a period of 6 (six) months from the date a certified copy of the instant order is served upon the respondents, more particularly, the respondent No.3, i.e. the Director General of Police, Assam Ulubari, Guwahati:781007.”
2. In pursuance to the verification so carried out, an amount of Rs. 13,86,462/- was found payable and had been paid to the petitioner.
3. This Court, vide an order dated 18.09.2026 sought instructions from the learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether the said amount has been received.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has received an amount of Rs. 13,86,462/-. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner further submitted that the amount to which he was entitled has not been paid and as such, it would not amount to compliance with the order dated 17.09.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 2542/2025.
5. This Court, at paragraph No. 5 of the order dated 17.09.2025 which is reproduced hereinabove had categorically directed the respondents to carry out the verification and thereupon pay only the amount which upon verification, is found to be due to the petitioner.
6. In the instant case, upon verification, it was found that the petitioner was only entitled to an amount of Rs. 13,86,462/-. The said amount has been paid.
7. Considering the above, it is the opinion of this Court that there has been substantial compliance with the order dated 17.09.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 2542/2025, for which the contempt proceeding stands dropped.
8. Before parting with the record, this Court, however, observes that if the petitioner is dissatisfied with the amount, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the Civil Court as regards his entitlement.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant