MAHABIR PRASAD AGARWALLA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. O. P. Bhati, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in the instant batch of writ petitions. Mr. P. Nayak, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the PWD who have been arrayed as respondents in the instant proceedings.

(2.) All the writ petitions are filed by the same petitioner who claims that he is a Class-I registered contractor with the Public Works Department of the Government of Assam. Various contract works were issued to the petitioner and the details of which have been mentioned in the present writ petitions. It is however very pertinent to take note of that these contract works were awarded to the petitioner prior to 2015 and this aspect is apparent from the fact that the writ petitions were filed in the year 2015. The grievance of the petitioner in all the writ petitions was that the Respondent Authorities have deducted huge amounts of money against the bills of the petitioner on the ground of payment of royalties which was not permissible as per law.

(3.) This Court finds it relevant to take note of the claims of the Petitioner in the five writ petitions and with specific reference to the contracts detailed out in each of the writ petitions. The same are given herein under: