JUDGMENT (A.M. Sapre, CJ) This writ petition (PIL) is filed by one Socio-Religious apolitical organization through their president – Mr. Md Ahmad Ali having their area of operation in Biswanath Charily, and sonitpur district in State of Assam. It is filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for invocation of extra ordinary jurisdiction in the field of what is called - Public Interest Litigation (PIL) for claiming following relief in relation to the subject matter of the writ petition (PIL) It is therefore humbly prayed that Your Lordships may be graciously pleased to admit this Application, call for record, Issue Rule, Calling Upon the respondents to show cause as to why Orders or Directions shall not be issued and upon hearing the parties on the cause/causes that may be shown and on perusal of records, be pleased to make the Rule absolute by granting to the petitioner to following relief/reliefs: Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or any other appropriate Writ, Direction or Order of the like nature directing the Respondent No.1 ton constitute an Enquiry Committee in consultation with the Respondent No.2 with an Expert to that effect to enquire into matter and after enquiry if it is found that repairing work of the Dyke is not upto the standard, it may be directed to the repaired at the cost of the erring officers and legal as well as departmental actions may be directed to be initiated against them and bills of the contractors be directed not to be paid by the respondent concerned till the repairing works of the Dyke is not completed as per the set standard for the safety and security of life and property of the people residing in the nearby localities of the Dyke and/or pass such other order/orders that Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.” In substance, the grievance of the petitioner’s organization in this writ petition is that due to torrential rains in recent past, there were floods in river Brahmaputra, which caused extensive damage to some areas in villages situated between Biswanath to Panpur such as Majarati Area, Solmari and Bortila area in Sonitpur District. These villages were inundated in the flood waters and extensively washed away resulting in depriving residents of these villages to either flee from the place of their residence or/and start living in some other areas or to live in temporary roof shelters provided by the State. It was alleged that due to this devastation occurred extensive damage was also caused to several embankments in the fields. It was alleged that despite such devastating natural calamity occurred, the State failed to take any concrete and effective steps to remedy the damage caused and injury suffered to the residents and nor took any effective measures to rehabilitate the affected persons due to which their fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 were infringed depriving them to live with dignity and it continued to be so infringed for not attending to the cause. This in substance was the grievance made by the petitioner in this PIL against the State and their authorities. On notice being served, the State through their authorities filed the return duly supported with affidavit. In the return, it was inter alia averred that the State duly attended to the damage caused in the area and brought the normalcy by spending huge amount and done everything that was necessary to do to remedy the fact situation. In support of this fact, the state also filed detail report, photographs and relevant documents such as estimate of the work needed to be done in the affected areas, sanctions granted by the authorities for execution of the work in the affected areas, amount spent in execution of the work and lastly the completion certificate of the work done in the concern areas issued by the DC of the area along with the photographs of the areas in question showing the work done. It was therefore contended that in the light of these voluminous documents submitted, the purpose of this PIL is for all practical purposes achieved and hence now no more orders are required to be issued in relation to the cause espoused in the PIL. Though learned counsel for the writ petitioner vehemently opposed the assertion made in the return by the State and doubting its correctness contended that no such work as claimed by the State has been done. Though learned counsel for the writ petitioner vehemently opposed the assertion made in the return by the State and doubting its correctness contended that no such work as claimed by the State has been done. However, having perused the return, affidavit and the documents annexed along with the return/affidavit, we are not inclined to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. In our considered view, since the petitioner was neither able to point out any error in the stand taken by the State in their return and nor was able to file any rebuttal evidence, except some photographs, we feel that the purpose of this PIL is achieved keeping in view the stand of the State. We also do not find any good ground to disbelieve what has been stated in the return by the State. In our view, there does not appear to be any cogent reason to keep this petition (PIL) pending for passing any further directions much less for holding any independent inquiry by any other agency because the documents/photographs do indicate that damage caused due to flood has been duly attended to and work done. So far the photographs (four in numbers) filed by the petitioner is concerned, we are not impressed by them for the reason that it is not clear as to they relate to which area. We cannot therefore on the basis of photograph disbelieve the report filed by the state. However before parting with the case, we consider it apposite to direct the state to further ensure that if any work remains to be done or if more is required to be done for the welfare and benefit of the residents of the affected area in question either in terms of their scheme evolved for the purpose or even otherwise, then it is the duty of the State to attend to the cause and complete the work on priority basis and provide all kinds of assistance to the affected persons living in the area and this order should not be construed as if nothing more need be done. It is with these observations, this petition stands accordingly disposed of/closed. No cost.