WP(C) 5169/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY The petitioner, though by the present petition has praye d for a direction to the respondent authorities to pay the outstanding amount of Rs.30,28,095/-, by the additional affidavit dated 24th September, 2010 filed by him, the petitioner claims that an amount of Rs.28,42,216/- is due and payable to him by the respondents for the works done. I have heard Ms. M. Das, learned counsel for the petitio ner and Mr. AK Goswami, the learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. P. Bhuiyan, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1. As agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the par ties that the matter in issue in the present writ petition has been answered in Tamsher Ali -Vs- State of Assam & Ors. reported in 2008 (4) GLT 1 and as such, t he present writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the directions contained in the aforesaid case. Mr. Goswami, however, submits that before registering th e name of the petitioner, as directed in Tamsher Ali’s case, the necessary verif ication relating to the entitlement of the petitioner, as claimed in the present petition, shall be made and if after verification any amount is found to be due and payable, the registration as directed in the aforesaid case shall be made. It appears that the petitioner by the aforesaid addition al affidavit has now claimed that an amount of Rs.28,42,216/- is due and payable to him for the works done by him. The issue relating to the outstanding amount due and payable to the contractors has already been answered in Tamsher Ali’s c ase. In view of the above, the present writ petition is dispo sed of with the direction to the respondent No.5, the Executive Engineer, PWD, B arpathar Road Division, to make an enquiry relating to the claim of the petition er and if upon such enquiry any amount is found to be due and payable, the name of the petitioner shall be registered in terms of the directions contained in Ta msher Ali’s case and the follow up action in terms of the said judgment shall th ereafter, be taken. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No cost.