Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/2755/2023 of PANKAJ KUMAR SINGH Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS on 14 May 2026
GAHC010096092023 2026:GAU-AS:6781 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2755/2023 PANKAJ KUMAR SINGH SON OF LATE NANDALAL SINGH, RESIDENT OF TIRAP GATE, PO- TIRAP DIST- TINSUKIA , PIN - 786182 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
GAHC010096092023
2026:GAU-AS:6781
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2755/2023
PANKAJ KUMAR SINGH
SON OF LATE NANDALAL SINGH, RESIDENT OF TIRAP GATE, PO- TIRAP
DIST- TINSUKIA , PIN - 786182
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF COMMISSIONER AD SPECIAL SECRETARY TO THE
GOVT. OF ASSAM PWRD, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006, ASSAM.
2:CHIEF ENGINEER
PWD (BORDER ROAD AND NEC)
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI- 781003.
3:EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PWD DIGBOI AND MARGHERITA TERRITORIAL ROAD DIVISION
MARGHERITA
ASSAM.
4:THE STATE QUALITY CO-ORDINATOR PMGSY
ASSAM CUM STATE ITNO
ASSAM PMGSY (CELL) O/O THE CHIEF ENGINEER
PWD(ROAD)
ASSAM CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI- 78100
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. K. Ghosh, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Gogoi, Addl. AG, Assam 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 : 15.05.2026
Heard Mr. S. K. Ghosh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. B. Gogoi, the learned Additional Advocate General who is also the Standing counsel of the PWD appearing on behalf of the Respondents.
2. The grievance of the Petitioner herein is that the Respondent Authorities have not uploaded his name pursuant to the death of his father in terms with Clause 55.2 of the General Clauses of the Contract and resultantly, the Petitioner has not been able to upload his current bills in E-Marg portal so that the Petitioner can get his pending bills for the work.
3. Mr. B. Gogoi, the learned Standing counsel for the PWD submitted that the uploading was done in month of June, 2023 and as such the writ petition has become infructuous.
4. Mr. S. K. Ghosh, the learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that though the Petitioner’s name has been uploaded in the E-Marg portal but on account of not being uploaded at that relevant point of time, the Petitioner could not submit the bills and those bills which had been submitted subsequent thereto are still pending.
5. Taking into account the relief which have been sought for, it is the opinion of this Court that the instant writ petition has become infructuous.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed.
7. Before parting with the records, this Court observes that if the Petitioner is aggrieved by the non-payment of the bills after being uploaded, the closure of the writ petition as infructuous shall not prejudice or preclude the Petitioner to avail appropriate remedies.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant