Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/2584/2022 of MD. KURBAN ALI HAZARIKA Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS on 17 May 2026
GAHC010070542022 2026:GAU-AS:6822 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2584/2022 MD. KURBAN ALI HAZARIKA S/O- MD. KUTUB ALI HAZARIKA R/O- MARABAZAR P.O- MORABAZAR P.S- AMGURI DIST- SIVASAGAR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8
GAHC010070542022
2026:GAU-AS:6822
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2584/2022
MD. KURBAN ALI HAZARIKA
S/O- MD. KUTUB ALI HAZARIKA
R/O- MARABAZAR
P.O- MORABAZAR
P.S- AMGURI
DIST- SIVASAGAR, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6
2:THE ASSAM URBAN WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD
REP BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
AMRITPUR PATH
GANESHGURI
GUWAHATI-06
3:THE DIBRUGARH MUNICIPAL BOARD
REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN
DIBRUGARH MUNICIPAL BOARD
ASSAM
4:THE ATAL MISSION FOR REJUVENATION AND URBAN
TRANSFORMATION
(AMRUT)
DISPUR GUWAHATI-06
5:THE MISSION DIRECTOR
ATAL MISSION FOR REJUVENATION AND URBAN TRANSFORMATION
(AMRUT)
DISPUR
GHY-06
6:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
DIBRUGARH
ASSAM
7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
DIBRUGARH
ASSAM
8:THE WORTHINGTON PUMPS INDIA LIMITED (WPIL)
TRINITY PLAZA
3RD FLOOR
84/1A
TOPSIA ROAD (SOUTH)
KOLKATA-70046
WEST BENGAL
9:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER
WORTHINGTON PUMPS INDIA LIMITED (WPIL)
DIBRUGARH
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P J SAIKIA, MS D DUTTA
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MS T J SAHEWALLA (R-8,9),MR H K SARMA (R- 8,9),MR M SAHEWALLA (R-8,9),MD ASLAM (R-8,9),MR G N SAHEWALLA (R-8,9)
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. P. J. Saikia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. H. K. Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 8 & 9 and Ms. V. Das, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 6 & 7.
2. The petitioner herein has approached this Court, seeking a direction upon the respondents to pay an amount of Rs. 2,04,39,298/-, which is due to the petitioner from the respondent No. 8 on account of works carried out by the petitioner as sub-contractor of the respondent No. 8, in respect of the works done under the respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4.
3. This Court has duly perused the materials on record and from a perusal of the materials on record, it is seen that the dispute in question is a private dispute between the petitioner and the respondent No. 8 and under such circumstances, it is the opinion of this Court that the ‘public law remedy’ cannot be initiated for such resolution of disputes.
4. Considering the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition, for which, the writ petition stands dismissed.
5. Before parting with the records, this Court, however, observes that the dismissal of the instant writ petition shall not preclude or prejudice the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum, seeking relief against the respondent No. 8. Further to that, this Court also duly takes note of that the petitioner has been bonafidely litigating in the present proceeding, believing that this Court may entertain the instant writ petition.
6. Considering the above, this Court observes that the period from
05.04.2022 till date, be excluded, while computing the period of limitation in preferring any claim against the respondent No. 8, if so advised.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant