Gauhati High Court

Cont.Cas(C)/403/2023 of PRAVEEN KUMAR GUPTA Vs KM GOPAL SANA RAJKUMAR on 14 May 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

GAHC010140302023 2026:GAU-AS:6772 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/403/2023 PRAVEEN KUMAR GUPTA S/O- RAGHUNATH PRASAD GUPTA, R/O- VILLAGE TENGA BASTI, ITAKHOLA, P.S- SOOTEA, DIST- BISWANATH CHARIALI, ASSAM VERSUS KM

GAHC010140302023

2026:GAU-AS:6772

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/403/2023

PRAVEEN KUMAR GUPTA

S/O- RAGHUNATH PRASAD GUPTA,

R/O- VILLAGE TENGA BASTI, ITAKHOLA, P.S- SOOTEA, DIST- BISWANATH

CHARIALI, ASSAM

VERSUS

KM GOPAL SANA RAJKUMAR

CHIEF ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF ASSAM, CHANDMARI, GUWAHATI-03

For the Petitioner(s) :Mr. K Sarma, Advocate.

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. N Upadhyay, Standing Counsel.

– B E F O R E –

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

-ORDER-

15.05.2026 Heard Mr. K. Sarma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. N Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel, Irrigation Department. [2] This is an application alleging willful and deliberate violation to the order dated 10.02.2023 passed in WP(C) 241/2021, whereby the learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court directed that the claim of the petitioner be verified and paid in terms of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Tamsher Ali & Ors. vs. State of Assam & Ors., reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1. [3] On account of no payment been made, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing the present petition. [4] Mr. N Upadhyay, the learned Standing Counsel, Irrigation Department pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 11.05.2026 has placed before this Court a speaking order dated 08.12.2023, wherein it was mentioned that the claim of the petitioner was unjustified, inasmuch as, the work was completed by one Babul Nath and the said Babul Nath has been paid his dues, as per the work so done. In that regard he has placed before this Court the instructions, dated 21.12.2023 of the Chief Engineer, Irrigation, which is accompanied by the speaking order, dated 08.12.2023 and both are kept collectively on record and marked with the letter ‘X’. [5] Taking into account the speaking order, dated 08.12.2023, nothing further survives in the contempt petition, for which the same stands closed. [6] Before parting with the records, this Court, however, observes that if the petitioner is aggrieved with the speaking order dated 08.12.2023, the petitioner would have the liberty to approach the appropriate forum, if so advised. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead