Sushanta Kumar Nayak vs. The State Of Assam And 5 Ors

Held

The Court held that the Petitioner is indeed entitled to the outstanding amount of Rs. 28,03,229/-. This finding was based on the categorical admission made by Respondent No. 6 in its affidavit-in-opposition, specifically in paragraph 6, which confirmed the Petitioner's entitlement to the said sum. The Court noted that the affidavit detailed the submission of the final bill and the subsequent steps taken by the authorities for fund release, including forwarding the proposal for financial sanction. The ratio decidendi is that an admitted liability, as confirmed by the respondent in their official submission to the court, must be directed to be paid. The operative directions were that the amount of Rs. 28,03,229/- be paid to the Petitioner after making necessary statutory deductions, within six months from the date of service of the order upon Respondent No. 3 (Director General of Police, Assam). Any amount already paid during the pendency of the writ petition was to be set off against this payment. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Sushanta Kumar Nayak, was awarded contract orders on August 16, 2019, for three construction works for the Police Academy in Dergaon, Golaghat district. The value of these contracts was later enhanced to Rs. 6,09,09,426.39 on February 14, 2023, based on a revised estimate. After completing the works, the petitioner submitted final bills, claiming an outstanding amount of Rs. 28,03,229. As this amount remained unpaid, the petitioner approached the Gauhati High Court seeking a direction for its release. The respondents, including the State of Assam and various police housing corporation officials, were represented.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to the outstanding amount of Rs. 28,03,229/- for the completed contract works, as claimed. The Petitioner argued that they had completed the contract works and submitted final bills, but the outstanding amount of Rs. 28,03,229/- had not been released, necessitating the present writ petition for a direction to the authorities. The Petitioner relied on the contract orders and the submission of final bills as evidence of their entitlement. The Respondents, through the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, submitted an affidavit-in-opposition. In paragraph 6 of this affidavit, Respondent No. 6 categorically stated that the Petitioner is entitled to the amount of Rs. 28,03,229/-. The affidavit further detailed the process of submitting the bill for release of funds, including agency charges and GST, and the subsequent forwarding of the proposal for financial sanction, which was yet to be received from the Government.