Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/18 vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 14 August, 2025
Page No.# 1/18
GAHC010238852013
2025:GAU-AS:5548
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/7324/2013
GROUP M MEDIA INDIA PVT. LTD. and ANR
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES
ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT COMMERZ, 8TH FLOOR,
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS PARK, OBEROI GARDEN CITY, OFF. WESTERN
EXPRESS HIGHWAY, GOREGAON EAST MUMBAI- 400063 ALSO HAVING
ITS OFFICE AND CARRYING ON BUSINESS FROM KOLKATA, HAVING ITS
LOCAL ADDRESS AT 30, BONDED ROAD, KOLKATA- 700019, REP. BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR SHRI GAUTAM GANGULI.
2: GAUTAM GANGULI S/O- DR. DEBA PRASAD GANGULI
R/O- D.L. 148 SECTOR- 2 SALT LAKE
KOLKATA- 700091
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
TOURISM DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY- 6.
2:THE PRINCIPAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
TOURISM DEPTT. GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GHY- 6.
3:THE SECY. FINANCE DEPTT. DISPUR GHY- 6.
4:THE DIRECTOR OF TOURISM DEPTT.
STATION ROAD GHY- 1 ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.B BHUYAN, MR.A K BHUYAN,MS.P PATHAK,MS.N
CHOUDHURY,MS.I KRISHNATRAIYA
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR.N UPADHAYA,MS.A DEKA,MR.M
MAHANTA,MR.S SARMA,MR.K N CHOUDHURY,ADDL. AG, ASSAM,MS.A BORPUJARI Page No.# 2/18 :::BEFORE:::
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR Date of hearing: 05.05.2025 Date of Judgment: 14.07.2025 JUDGMENT & ORDER(CAV) Heard Mr. A. K. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Dipankar Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, Assam, appearing on behalf of all the respondents.
2. The petitioner, herein, in the present proceeding, has raised a grievance with regard to the non-release of its outstanding contractual dues amounting to Rs. 63,09,596/-(Rupees Sixty Three Lakhs Nine Thousand Five Hundred and Ninety Six) only.
3. The brief facts requisite for adjudication of the issue arising in the present proceeding, is noticed as under:
The Director of Tourism, Government of Assam, had in the year 2011, issued an Expression of Interest, for empanelment of advertising agencies for carrying-out TV campaign on behalf of the Tourism Department, through various television channels.
The petitioner had expressed its interest and had submitted its particulars in the prescribed format, with supporting documents on 31-01-2011. Thereafter, on a scrutiny being made, the petitioner was shortlisted for making Page No.# 3/18 a presentation before the selection committee and the date for such presentation was scheduled on 12-02-2011 in the office of the Director of Tourism, Assam. On conclusion of the selection process, a communication, dated 15-02-2011, came to be issued by the Director of Tourism, Assam, requiring the petitioner to submit its financial bid on or before 24-02-2011.
The financial bid now required to be submitted by the petitioner, herein, was to be so submitted by including, therein, national/international channels along with the regional channels for telecast of the programmes as prepared. The petitioner submitted its financial bid and the same being found to be suitable, a communication, dated 21-04-2011, came to be issued to the petitioner Firm empanelling it as an advertising agency under the Directorate of Tourism, Government of Assam.
The petitioner submitted its acceptance in the matter and thereafter, an agreement was executed on 06-09-2011, by and between the Government of Assam, represented by the Director of Tourism, Assam, and the petitioner, herein. In terms of the said agreement, the petitioner was to submit an ideal and cost-effective media plan covering the TV channels highlighted, therein, for a national campaign with a budget of Rs. 3,78,37,806/- for the first phase of the campaign spanning 4(four) months, ensuring maximum mileage of the campaign. The petitioner was required to execute the first phase of campaign spanning a period of 4(four) months. The manner of release of payment to the petitioner was also set-out in the said agreement. On conclusion of the campaign, the petitioner was required to submit the original copies of the bills received from the TV channels for release of its dues.
As projected in the writ petition, the petitioner, herein, in accordance Page No.# 4/18 with the plans, as approved in the matter, proceeded with the campaign and concluded the same. On successful completion of the campaign, the petitioner Firm submitted invoices amounting to Rs. 3,22,00,000/-(approx.) before the competent authority. The said amounts not being cleared, the petitioner had submitted a representation in the matter.
It is further projected in the writ petition that out of the total admitted outstanding amount due to the petitioner, he had received a total amount of Rs. 2,59,57,092/-(approx.), on 12-04-2012, and 09-09-2011, respectively. A balance of Rs. 63,09,596/-, however, remained unpaid to the petitioner.
The persuasions made by the petitioner, in the matter, led to the issuance of a communication, dated 05-02-2013, wherein, the Government had informed the Director of Tourism, Assam, of its approval for payment of the balance amount of Rs. 63,09,595.54 only to the petitioner against the telecast of TV commercials produced by Sri Jahnu Barua. Inspite of the said approval granted by the authorities, the amount not being released to the petitioner, he had insulted the present proceedings.
4. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner, after reiterating the facts as noticed hereinabove, has submitted that the petitioner had on successful completion of the campaign involved, submitted invoices amounting to Rs. 3,22,00,000/-. On 12-04-2012, the petitioner was paid and released an amount of Rs. 75,67,562/- and thereafter, on 02-04-2012, a further amount of Rs. 1,78,70,388/- was so released to him. The learned counsel has further submitted that out of the amount claimed by the petitioner; only an amount of Rs.2,59,57,092/-, (approx.) was released to him and an amount of Rs. 63,09,596/- remained as arrears.
Page No.# 5/18
5. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel, by referring to the communication, dated 05-02-2013, has submitted that the said communication would go to reveal that the Government had approved for the release of the remaining dues of the petitioner and the money being so available, the Director of Tourism, Assam, could not have denied the release of such admitted due amount of the petitioner.
6. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel, has further submitted that the respondents, in the present writ petition, by way of filing affidavits, have disputed the claim of the petitioner by raising objections.
7. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel, has submitted that the first objection raised by the respondents in the present proceeding is to the effect that the petitioner had only telecasted 6(six) TV commercials produced by Sri Jahnu Barua in lieu of 12(twelve) TV commercials that it was required to telecast and for which the budget was sanctioned by the Government. The second objection raised by the respondents in the present proceeding is to the effect that the petitioner had not submitted the clippings of the commercials aired by various channels. The third objection raised by the respondents in the present writ petition is to the effect that the original bills as issued by the TV channels, were not submitted by the petitioner Firm to the respondents.
8. With regard to the first objection raised by the respondents pertaining to the number of TV commercials required to be telecast by the petitioner is concerned, Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel, has submitted that the agreement entered into by and between the petitioner with the authorities, did not specify the number of commercials that the petitioner was to telecast during the first phase of the campaign for the period of 4(four) months. The learned counsel Page No.# 6/18 has further submitted that the petitioner was involved in the campaign only for the first period of 4(four) months. The learned counsel has submitted that the records of the matter, would reveal that the producer of the commercial Sri Jahnu Barua, had, vide a communication, dated 13-06-2011, informed the Director of Tourism, Assam, that he had only furnished the campaign sequence for the TV spots for the first 4(four) months and in this connection, had programmed only 6(six) TV spots for the first phase. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel, has further submitted that the communications and the materials brought on record by the parties, would go to reveal that at the initial stage of the campaign, only 1(one) TV spot was furnished to the petitioner and thereafter, 5(five) TV spots were so furnished to it. The learned counsel has submitted that there is no material available on record to reflect that the respondents had furnished to the petitioner all the 12(twelve) TV spots, as alleged. Accordingly, Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel, has submitted that the petitioner, herein, had aired the 6(six) TV commercials as handed over to it, strictly, in terms of the approved media plan.
9. With regard to the second objection raised by the respondents that the petitioner had not submitted the clippings of the aired TV commercials, Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel, has submitted that the agreement, in question, did not mandate submission of such clippings of the aired TV commercials. The learned counsel has further submitted that the respondents had required the petitioner to submit the said clippings only vide an e-mail, dated 16-05-2012 and by that time, a period of 90 days having so lapsed with effect from the date when the TV commercials were aired; the same could not be furnished, in-as-much as, the television channels preserve the footings only for a period of 90 days.
Page No.# 7/18
10. With regard to the third objection raised by the respondents pertaining to non-submission of the original bills by the petitioner Firm from the television channels in support of the amounts claimed by it, Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel, has submitted that the petitioner Firm had already submitted the original bills issued by the respective TV channels to the respondent authorities. However, an issue being raised in this connection, the petitioner, herein, had submitted certificates to that effect, from the concerned TV channels. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel, has submitted that the said aspect of the matter, would be clear on a mere perusal of a Note, dated 10-02-2013, issued by the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Tourism Department, available in File No. TSM-155/2007/Pt., which goes to reveal that the copies of the bill submitted by the petitioner, were forwarded to the Government by the Director of Tourism, Assam, and thereafter, basing on a requirement made of the petitioner to furnish the certificates from the TV channels which had telecast the commercials produced by Sri Jahnu Barua; the certificates were so produced and incorporated in the File, in question. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel, has also submitted that the certificates indicated in the said Note, were held to have been issued by the TV channels. Further, Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel, has submitted that it is under the said circumstances that the Secretary, Department of Tourism, had proceeded to approve for payment of the remaining dues of the petitioner. The learned counsel has, accordingly, submitted that the objections raised by the respondents, in the present proceeding, in this connection, would not be sustainable.
11. In this connection, Mr. Bhuyan, has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of OPTO, Circuit India Ltd. v. Axis Bank & ors., reported in (2021) 6 SCC 707.
Page No.# 8/18
12. Mr. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, by referring to the affidavits filed by the respondents in the matter, has submitted that the campaign was to be so undertaken by telecast of 12(twelve) no. of commercials produced by Sri Jahnu Barua. However, it was found that the petitioner had only telecast 6(six) nos. of the commercials out of the 12(twelve) nos. of the commercials prepared for the matter. Mr. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, has further submitted that the agreement entered into by the petitioner for payment of an amount of Rs. 3,78,37,806/- for telecast of 12(twelve) nos. of TV commercials, the petitioner not having telecast the prepared 12(twelve) nos. of commercials; he cannot claim the total amount as incorporated in the said agreement, dated 06-09-2011.
13. Mr. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, has further submitted that the petitioner, herein, was required to submit the original clippings of the TV commercials aired by the various TV channels. The learned Senior Government Advocate has submitted that the same was required to ascertain as to whether the TV channels, in question, had actually aired such commercials under the campaign that was undertaken by the Department of Tourism, Government of Assam. The learned Senior Government Advocate has also submitted that the clippings of the said TV commercials, not being furnished by the petitioner; the respondent authorities had proceeded to withhold the amount of Rs. 63,09,595.54.
14. Mr. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, has submitted that in terms of the agreement, dated 06-09-2011; the petitioner, herein, was required to submit the original copies of the bills received from the TV channels on completion of the campaign along with the bills raised by it, in the matter. The learned Senior Government Advocate has further submitted that Page No.# 9/18 the petitioner not having submitted the original copies of the bills from the TV channels and having only submitted a few of them; the total amount as due to the petitioner, herein, could not be released.
15. Mr. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, has submitted that the respondents, herein, in view of the default occasioning on the part of the petitioner, in airing 12(twelve) nos. of commercials and having only aired 6(six) nos. of them; non-submission of the video clippings of the TV commercials aired by various TV channels, as well as non-submission of the original copies of the bills received from the TV channels; the amount claimed by the petitioner, herein, was not released in full. The learned Senior Government Advocate has further submitted that the respondents, on a reconciliation made in the matter, had found an amount of Rs. 27,00,059/-, in excess, was released to the petitioner and the said amount is liable to be recovered from the petitioner, herein.
16. In view of the above position, Mr. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, has submitted that a disputed question of fact having arisen in the matter, this Court would be pleased not to entertain the present petition and require the petitioner to move before the civil Court of competent jurisdiction for redressal of its grievances.
17. I have heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.
18. Considering the nature of dispute arising in the present proceeding; this Court, in course of hearing of the present proceeding, had required the Page No.# 10/18 respondents to produce the records of the matter. Accordingly, Mr. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, has furnished the original Files being :-
(i) No. TSM.155/2007/Pt., and (ii) DT-PUB/17/Pt-I/2004. This Court has duly perused the contents of the said Files.
19. At the outset, this Court would like to observe that in the event, in a writ proceeding; a disputed question of fact arises, the same would not bar this Court from entertaining a writ petition. This Court is not deprived of its jurisdiction to entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, merely, because in considering the petitioner's right to relief, questions of fact may fall to be determined. It is a settled position of law that in a petition under Article 226, the High Court has jurisdiction to try issues, both, of fact and law. Exercise of jurisdiction, it is true, is discretionary, but, the discretion must be exercised on some judicial principle. When the petition raises questions of fact of a complex nature, which may, for the determination, require oral evidence to be taken and on that count, this Court is of the view that the dispute may not be appropriately tried in a writ petition; this Court may decline to try a petition. However, merely, because one of the parties to the litigation, raises a dispute with regard to the facts involved in the case; this Court is not restrained from entertaining such petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and is not always bound to relegate the parties to a suit. The materials produced before this Court, in the event, permits this Court to adjudicate the disputes raised by one of the parties; mere existence of a disputed question of fact, would not prevent this Court from determining the same.
20. Having noticed the position of law as obtaining in the matter; this Court would now consider the issues arising in the matter, including the objections Page No.# 11/18 raised by the respondents. The petitioner, on being selected for undertaking an advertisement campaign through TV channels on behalf of the Directorate of Tourism, Assam; an agreement was executed between the petitioner, herein, and the Government of Assam represented by the Director of Tourism, Assam, on 06-09-2011. In terms of the said agreement; the petitioner, herein, was to submit the most ideal and cost effective media plan covering the TV channels noticed, therein, for a national campaign with a budget of Rs. 3,78,37,806/-, for the first phase of the said campaign spanning 4(four) months, ensuring maximum mileage for the campaign. Accordingly, the petitioner was to execute the first phase of the campaign spanning a period of 4(four) months. Clause 5 of the agreement, mandates that the Government shall release payments to the petitioner in installments as mentioned, therein. The first installment of 20% was to be paid on execution of the agreement as mobilisation advance. Thereafter, subsequent payments were to be made, on receipt of actual bills on month to month basis and on successful completion of the campaign, the last installment of 10% was to be released. Clause 7 of the said agreement, mandates that the Government shall hand over the original creatives of the campaign made by Sri Jahnu Barua in DVD format to the petitioner along with the sequence to be followed for releasing to the TV channels. Clause 12 of the said agreement, mandates that the petitioner shall submit original copies of the bills received from TV channels on completion of the campaign for processing of its dues.
21. In terms of the said agreement undertaken, it is seen that the petitioner, via an e-mail, dated 20-05-2014, was forwarded one of the TV commercials prepared; for going on air. Thereafter, vide a further e-mail issued on the same date, i.e., 20-05-2014, the petitioner was informed that the Director of Tourism, Assam, was couriering 5(five) more cassettes of TV spots to it. The pleadings brought on record by the respondents, does not reveal that any Page No.# 12/18 further commercials of the TV spots as produced by Sri Jahnu Barua, was handed-over to the petitioner in addition to the said 6(six) TV commercials as noticed hereinabove.
22. At this stage, it is to be noted that on 13-06-2011, Sri Jahnu Barua, the producer of the TV commercials, had informed the Director of Tourism, Assam, that as on the said date, he had only programmed 6(six) TV spots in the campaign sequence and had enclosed the said 6(six) TV spots for the first 4(four) months of the campaign. The said 6(six) TV spots only being demonstrated to have been forwarded to the petitioner for being aired through various TV channels during the first phase of the campaign for which the petitioner was engaged, i.e., for the first 4(four) months w.e.f. September, 2011, to December, 2011; this Court finds that the objection raised by the respondents to the effect that the petitioner, herein, is not entitled to be released his entire dues on account of the fact that he had not aired 12(twelve) nos. of TV commercials and had aired only 6(six) nos. of TV commercials, to be clearly perverse.
23. With regard to the second objection raised by the respondents to the effect that the petitioner, herein, is not entitled to be released his arrears on account of the fact that he had not furnished the clippings of the aired TV commercials, the said objection, when viewed in the light of the agreement entered into by and between the parties on 06-09-2011; it is revealed that there was no requirement incorporated, therein, requiring the petitioner, herein, to submit the TV clippings of the aired TV commercials. The said request was made of the petitioner through an e-mail, dated 16-05-2012. The petitioner responded to the said e-mail and had categorically stated that the said TV clippings would not be permissible to be so furnished, in-as-much as, Page No.# 13/18 the TV channels preserve the footings of the aired programmes only for a period of 90 days and after a period of lapse of 90 days; the said footings are not available. The e-mail, dated 16-05-2012, requiring the petitioner, herein, for furnishing the clippings of the aired TV commercials, admittedly, having been issued after lapse of 90 days from the date, the campaign had ended, given the undisputed projection made by the petitioner that TV channels preserve the footings only for a period of 90(ninety) days from its telecast; this Court is of the considered view that such requirement was one which the petitioner could not have fulfilled. As noticed hereinabove, the same being not a requirement incorporated in the agreement, dated 06-09-2011, entered by and between the parties, on the said count, the bills of the petitioner could not have been withheld.
24. At this stage, a communication, dated 05-02-2013, issued by the Under Secretary to the Government of Assam, Tourism Department, to the Director of Tourism, Assam, is to be considered. The said communication, being relevant, is extracted hereinbelow:
"GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM TOURISM DEPARTMENT::: DISPUR No. TSM. 155/2007/pt/142 Dated Dispur, the 5th February, 2013 From : Smti. A Goswami, ACS Under Secretary to the Govt. of Assam Tourism Department, Dispur, Guwahati-6.
Sub : Payment of balance amount against telecast of TV Commercials. Ref : No.DT-PUB/17/pt-1/2004/149/3049 did. 26.11.2012. Sir, In inviting a reference to the above, I am directed to inform you that Govt approves payment of the balance amount of Rs. 61,09,595.54 (Rupees Sixty Three Lacs Nine Thousand Five Hundred Ninety five and Fifty Four) only to the Group M Media Pvt. Ltd against the telecast of TV Commercial produced by Shri Jahnu Barua.
Page No.# 14/18 You are also requested for putting your views regarding the balance amount left with the Directorate after the payment. All payment should be done on receipt of specific original bills and not simply on certificates. All tax & statutory deductions should also be made at Source and remitted to Govt Accounts.
Yours faithfully, Sd/-15/2/13 Under Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Tourism Department, Dispur."
25. A perusal of the said communication, dated 05-02-2013, would go to reveal that the Government had approved the payment of the balance amount of Rs. 63,09,595.54 to the petitioner, herein, against the telecast of TV commercials produced by Sri Jahnu Barua. In the said communication, it was required that the payment should be released on receipt of specific original bills and not simply on certificates.
26. The above conclusions have been drawn, this Court would now examine the contention of the respondents that the petitioner, not having submitted the original copies of the bills received from the TV channels on completion of the campaign, his claim for being released the total amount as claimed by him; would not be maintainable. It is an admitted position that in terms of the provisions of Clause 12 of the agreement, dated 06-09-2011, the petitioner was required to submit the original copies of the bills received from the TV channels on completion of the campaign along with his claim for being released the amounts becoming due to him. The respondents have further contended that on a reconciliation made of the bills received from the petitioner, in terms of Clause 12 of the agreement, dated 06-09-2011, i.e., the original copies of the bills received from the TV channels and the amount paid to the petitioner; it was found that an amount of Rs. 27,00,059/- was paid, in excess, to the petitioner, herein.
Page No.# 15/18
27. The materials brought on record would reveal that the said issue was examined by the respondent authorities from time to time and was finally resolved vide a Note, dated 10-02-2013, made by the Secretary of Tourism, Assam, in File No. TSM-155/2007/Pt. The said Note, being relevant to the issue arising in the present proceeding, is extracted hereinbelow:
"Principal Secretary, Notes from 23/N bottom to 26/N ante may kindly be perused.
The matter refers to sanction of Rs. 3,82,13,000.00/- for telecasting 12 TV commercials that were produced by Shri Jahnu Baruah. Accordingly, an agreement was signed between D.T. Assam and Group M Media Pvt. Ltd with due approval of the department. As per the agreement Group M Media India Pvt. is to complete the production with an amount of Rs.3,78,37,806.00/-. Hence there is a difference of Rs.3,75,174.00/- at the initial stage the reason thereof is not clear, As per the agreement, the payment of Rs. 3,78,37,806.00/- was to be paid by three installments and accordingly, the first installment of Rs. 75,67,562.00/- was paid. Thereafter, another amount of Rs. 1,78,7,0388.00/- was paid to the Group. Hence, the total amount paid till date comes to Rs. 2,54,37,950.00/-.
Subsequent to this, Group M Media have made a claim for payment of the remaining amount, as per their contention, i.e. Rs.63,09,594.54/-. We have sought for the video clippings of the telecast programme, to which Group M Media Pvt. Ltd. have informed their inability to supply the clippings since, according to them, (S1. 88/C) the records are kept only for a period of 3 month (90) days. These 90 days have in the meantime, been exhausted. But as per clause 8 of the agreement at flag 'X', the original DVDs of Jhanu Barua have to be returned to the Directorate (first party) on completion of the project). D.T. Assam's claim may be kindly be seen at flag "D". D.T. Assam states that 12 DVD's pertaining to the commercials were handed over to the office by Shri Jahnu Barua and it is in the safe custody of the Directorate(flag 'D').
We have received copies of the bills forwarded by the Director of Tourism.
Pursuant to subsequent correspondences, Group M Media has agreed to furnish certificates from the TV Channels who had telecast the commercials produced by Jhanu Barua as it will not be possible on their part to furnish the video clippings of the telecast programme.
The certificates were produced and have been annexed at flag "C".
It is seen that these certificates have been certified by the TV Channels.
Page No.# 16/18 Since the money available with the Director of Tourism, Assam, is Rs. 1,27,75,050.00/- the outstanding dues amounting to Rs. 63,09,594.54/- can be considered for payment.
The balance amount that will remain with the Director of Tourism is Rs.64.65,455.00/-. This amount can be refunded into the State exchequer or utilized following due procedure during the current financial year."
28. A perusal of the said Note would go to reveal that on being asked, the petitioner had agreed to furnish certificates from the TV channels which had telecast the commercials produced by Sri Jahnu Barua. The certificates, on being produced, it was found that the same were certified by the concerned TV channels. It is after drawing satisfaction about compliance by the petitioner of the provisions of clause 12 of the agreement, dated 06-09-2011, that the Secretary of Tourism, Assam, had directed for release of the amount of Rs. 63,09,594.54, to the petitioner, herein, being his remaining dues. The said Note of the Secretary of Tourism, Assam, and the disclosures made, therein, would go to reveal that the contentions raised by the respondents, in the present proceeding, is clearly not sustainable and have been made only as an afterthought. The requirement as incorporated in the communication, dated 05-02-2013, issued by the Under Secretary to the Government of Assam, Tourism Department, mandating release of the dues of the petitioner only on approval of the production of the original copies of the bills issued by the TV channels, was resolved by the authorities and such release of the dues of the petitioner, herein, was approved in view of the certificates furnished by the petitioner from the TV channels. The said aspect of the matter is also clear from the Note, dated 10-02-2013, of the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Tourism Department.
29. It being an admitted position that the competent authorities having already resolved the issue with regard to non-submission of the original copies Page No.# 17/18 of the bills by the petitioner, herein, and accepted the certificates furnished in this connection by the petitioner from the TV channels involved; the respondents cannot be permitted to raise the said issue again and thus, this Court holds that due satisfaction about the veracity of the claim made by the petitioner having already been drawn by the authorities; the dispute raised in the present proceeding, in this connection, would not mandate an acceptance. The other objections being not maintainable, this Court is of the considered view that the disputes raised by the respondents, in the present proceeding, are in form only and not in substance.
30. Accordingly, the said objections in view of the revelations made from the records produced in the matter; would not mandate acceptance by this Court and the petitioner, herein, is found to be entitled to be released the amount of Rs. 63,09,596/-, being his arrear contractual dues.
31. In view of the above discussions and the disputes raised by the respondents, herein, having been concluded by this Court to be without any substance; this Court directs the respondent authorities, more particularly, the Respondents No. 1, 2 & 4, herein, to release to the petitioner, his arrear contractual dues of Rs. 63,09,595.54, within a period of 45(forty five) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
32. As the petitioner has submitted that he would not be claiming any interest for the delay occasioning in releasing to him, his admitted contractual dues; this Court refrains from passing any order attaching interest to the amount due to the petitioner with effect from the date, it was so due. However, it is provided that in the event, the amount of Rs. 63,09,595.54, is not released to the petitioner, herein, within a period of 45(forty five) days Page No.# 18/18 from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order; the said amount would entail an interest at the rate of 6% from the date of disposal of the this writ petition.
33. The records produced by Mr. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, Assam, and noticed hereinabove; be returned forthwith.
34. With the above directions and observations; this writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant