Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/933/2025 of KAMAL UDDIN CHOUDHURY Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. on 3 May 2026
GAHC010031802025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/933/2025 KAMAL UDDIN CHOUDHURY SON OF LATE ASAD ALI CHOUDHURY, R/O VILLAGE- WEST KANISHAIL, P.O. KANISHAIL, DISTRICT- SRIBHUMI, ASSAM, PIN- 788711. VERSUS THE STATE
GAHC010031802025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/933/2025
KAMAL UDDIN CHOUDHURY
SON OF LATE ASAD ALI CHOUDHURY, R/O VILLAGE- WEST KANISHAIL, P.O. KANISHAIL, DISTRICT- SRIBHUMI, ASSAM, PIN- 788711.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
OF ASSAM, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.
2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
ASSAM
AWC BASISTHA
GUWAHATI-29
3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
HAILAKANDI W.R. CIRCLE
HAILAKANDI
P.O. AND DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI
ASSAM
PIN-788151
4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
WATER RESOURCES DIVISION
KARIMGANJ
P.O. AND DISTRICT- KARIMGANJ
ASSAM
PIN-788710
5:THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
WATER RESOURCES SUB-DIVISION
KARIMGANJ
DISTRICT- KARIMGANJ
ASSAM
PIN-788710
6:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
JANATA BHAWAN
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N HAQUE, MR. A K AZAD,MR K UDDIN
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, WATER RESOURCE, SC, FINANCE DEPTT.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE
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 : 04-05-2026 Heard Mr. K. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. Tinlung, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. R.M. Das, learned standing counsel for the Water Resource department.
2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to make payment of a sum of Rs. 2,91,532/- (Rupees two lakh ninety one thousand five hundred and thirty two only) against a contract work executed by the petitioner in respect of the maintenance and repairing works under the Department of Water Resource, Hailakandi Circle, Hailakandi.
3. The petitioner claims to be a contractor under the Water Resource Department, Govt. of Assam who has executed various works in the Departments of the Govt. of Assam.
4. The petitioner was issued work orders for execution of the work namely, (1) M & R to protecting the area from Phanirbond to Dullabpur from flooding of River Shingla for 2012- 13 (Breach Closing at Madanpur), (2) M & R to embankment along B/B of river Longai from
Patherkandi to Nilambazar Ph-II (R/B) for 2012-13 at Chanage -6200-16825 M and (3) M & R to protection of Karimganj Town from River Kushiyara at Deopur Ring Bund for 2012-13, K-4 vide Work Order Nos. (1) SEWR/ HKD/ C/S/2012-13/175/8 dated 29.10.2012, (2) SEWR/HKD/C/S 2012-13/171/4 dated 23.11.2012 by the Superintending Engineer, / Hailakandi W.R. Circle, Hailakandi and (3) No.KXJ/T-10/WO/M&R/Divn/2012-13/94 dated 05.01.2013 by the Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division, Karimganj.
5. It is the case of the petitioner that he has executed the aforesaid works to the satisfaction of the authorities and had submitted the bills for payment. However, no payment has been released to the petitioner despite several approaches.
6. The petitioners submitted several representations last being dated 04.08.2017 to the Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division, Karimganj requesting to release the payment to the petitioner. However, no consideration has been made as on today. Therefore, it is submitted that the respondent authorities may be directed to release the admitted outstanding amount of Rs.2,91,532/- (Rupees two lakh ninety one thousand five hundred and thirty two only) to the petitioner.
7. Ms. Tinlung, learned counsel for the Water Resource Department fairly submits that she has no objection if the Court directs the respondent authorities to verify the claim of the petitioner and if found, admitted, may be directed to release the payment to the petitioner.
8. The respondents despite receipt of notice through their learned counsels on 21.02.2025 have not filed any affidavit which would indicates that the claim of the petitioner is undisputed.
9. This Court in several writ petitions being WP(C) 294/2024, WP(C) 268/2024, WP(C) 269/2024, WP(C) 266/2024 in respect of the same chainage of works but of different locations and districts in the State has disposed of all the aforesaid writ petitions with a direction to have verification with regard to the claim of the petitioner and if found admitted shall pay to the petitioners within a certain time line.
10. Having considered that the petitioner appears to have executed the work in terms of the aforesaid three work orders, (1) M & R to protecting the area from Phanirbond to Dullabpur from flooding of River Shingla for 2012-13 (Breach Closing at Madanpur), (2) M & R to embankment along B/B of river Longai from Patherkandi to Nilambazar Ph-II (R/B) for 2012-13 at Chanage -6200-16825 M and (3) M & R to protection of Karimganj Town from River Kushiyara at Deopur Ring Bund for 2012-13, K-4 vide Work Order Nos. (1) SEWR/ HKD/ C/S/2012-13/175/8 dated 29.10.2012, (2) SEWR/HKD/C/S 2012-13/171/4 dated 23.11.2012 issued by the Superintending Engineer, / Hailakandi W.R. Circle, Hailakandi and (3) No.KXJ/T- 10/ WO/ M&R/Divn/2012-13/94 dated 05.01.2013 and considering that the respondents have not filed any affidavit disputing the claim of the petitioner, the Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to verify the claim of the petitioner and if found admitted to release the said amount of Rs. 2,91,532/- (Rupees two lakh ninety one thousand five hundred and thirty two only) to the petitioner.
11. It is ordered accordingly.
12. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 4(four) months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.
13. This writ petition stands disposed of in terms above.
JUDGE. Comparing Assistant