Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/2581/2026 of KAMAL SINGH DUGAR Vs THE RUBBER BOARD AND 6 ORS. on 17 May 2026
GAHC010090112026 2026:GAU-AS:6813 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2581/2026 KAMAL SINGH DUGAR S/O LT. MULCHAND DUGAR R/O H/NO. 09, BYE LANE NO. 10 SOUTH SARANIA, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI- 781007, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE
GAHC010090112026
2026:GAU-AS:6813
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2581/2026
KAMAL SINGH DUGAR
S/O LT. MULCHAND DUGAR
R/O H/NO. 09, BYE LANE NO. 10 SOUTH SARANIA, ULUBARI, GUWAHATI- 781007, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM
VERSUS
THE RUBBER BOARD AND 6 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, KOTTAYAM-686009, KERALA,INDIA.
2:THE DIRECTOR P AND RD
THE RUBBER BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PROCESSING AND PRODUCT
DEVELOPMENT
KOTTAYAM- 686009
KERALA
INDIA.
3:THE JOINT DIRECTOR
THE RUBBER BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PROCESSING AND PRODUCT
DEVELOPMENT
KOTTAM -686009
KERALA
INDIA.
4:THE JOINT DIRECTOR (P AND QC)
THE RUBBER BOARD DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING AND PROCESSING
DIVISION
KOTTAYAM-686009
INDIA.
5:THE JOINT RUBBER PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER
RUBBER BOARD ZONAL OFFICE
CENTRAL BLOCK II
1ST FLOOR
HOUSEFED COMPLEX
BELTOLA
BASISTHA ROAD
GUWAHATI-781006.
6:THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
RUBBER BOARD ZONAL OFFICE
CENTRAL BLOCK-II
1ST FLOOR
HOUSEFED COMPLEX
BELTOLA
BASISTHA ROAD
GUWAHATI-781006.
7:JUNIOR ENGINEER
CIVIL
RUBBER BOARD ZONAL OFFICE
CENTRAL BLOCK-II
1ST FLOOR
HOUSEFED COMPLEX
BELTOLA BASISTHA ROAD
GUWAHATI-781006
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. H. BURAGOHAIN, MR. C AGARWAL,MS. H BORAH,MS A
DEVI
Advocate for the Respondent : ,
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
18.05.2026 Heard Mr. H. Buragohain, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the actions on the part of the
Rubber Board in not only rejecting the claim of the petitioner to the amount of Rs. 3,32,300.92p., but also for informing the petitioner that on the other hand, the petitioner has to pay an amount of Rs. 4,03,257/-.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the action on the part of the respondent authorities, more particularly, the Rubber Board, is arbitrary; taking into account that the risk and cost, which is sought to be imposed upon the petitioner, has been done at a much belated stage and therefore, the actions on the part of the said Rubber Board is not fair.
4. This Court has duly taken note of the aforesaid aspect and is of the opinion that the instant dispute is purely a dispute of civil nature. The question as to whether, the respondent Rubber Board would be entitled to recover any amount from the petitioner to the tune of Rs. 4,03,257/- or for that matter, whether the risk and cost could have been imposed upon the petitioner after a long lapse of time, as has been contended by the petitioner; are questions of facts, which are required to be agitated before a Court of competent jurisdiction, wherein, evidence can be led. Apart from the above, the question of damages are to be ascertained before the appropriate forum, rather than initiating a public law remedy.
5. Under such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition, for which, this writ petition stands dismissed.
6. Before parting with the record, this Court, however, observes that the dismissal of the instant writ petition shall not preclude or prejudice of the petitioner to approach the competent Court of jurisdiction, if so otherwise permissible under law.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant