JUDGMENT : DEVASHIS BARUAH, J. 1. The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the Respondent Authorities in not making payment of the bills of the petitioner. The case of the petitioner herein is that the Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Division No. II, Guwahati, had issued eight work orders in favour of the petitioner which are (I) PHEE/G-II/TC-233(Vol-XVI/pt-V(A)2018-19/8807 dated 04.01.2019, (II) PHEE/G-II/TC-228/Vol-41/2021-22/5752 dated 27.12.2021; (III) PHEE/G-II/TC-228/Vol-41/2021-22/6380 dated 30.12.2021; IV) PHEE/G-II/TC-228/Vol-41/2021-22/8309 dated 28.01.2022; V) PHEE/G-II/TC-228/Vol-41/2022-23/6084 dated 09.12.2022; VI) PHEE/G-II/TC-228/Vol-41/2022-23/8692 dated 23.12.2022; VII) PHEE/G-II/TC-228/Vol-41/2022-23/8848 dated 26.12.2022; VIII) PHEE/G-II/TC-228/Vol-41/2022-23/8854 dated 26.12.2022. In the said formal work orders, the tender values were quoted as Rs. 1,36,957/-; Rs. 1,33,270/-; Rs. 1,15,150/-; Rs. 83,355/-; Rs. 1,35,928/-; Rs. 2,55,942/-; Rs.2,17,405/- and Rs. 3,87,411/- respectively. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner successfully executed the works and accordingly submitted the bills for the said works. As per the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled to amount of Rs. 1,36,957/-; Rs. 1,33,270/-; Rs. 1,15,150/-; Rs. 83,355/-; Rs. 1,35,928/-; Rs. 2,55,942/-; Rs. 2,17,405 and Rs. 3,87,411/- thereby totaling to Rs.14,65,418/-. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had submitted various representations to the Respondent Authorities for release of the said amount however, the said amount had not been paid, for which, the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. 3. Mr. I. Borthakur, the learned Standing Counsel, PHE Department appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted an instruction issued by the Executive Engineer, (PHE), Guwahati Division No. II, Guwahati to the effect that certain payments are due to the petitioner in respect to the works which have been duly completed by the petitioner. It has also been mentioned that after receiving the budget, the said payment would be made. The said instruction is kept on record and marked with the letter “X.” 4. Upon perusal of the materials on record, this Court is of the opinion that if the petitioner had completed the works in question, the petitioner would be entitled to the amount as claimed. However, for the same, verification on the part of the Respondent Authorities would be required. 5. This Court, therefore, disposes of the instant writ petition with the following observations and directions:- i) The Respondent Authorities shall verify as to whether the petitioner had successfully executed the said works in question as per the aforementioned work orders. However, for the same, verification on the part of the Respondent Authorities would be required. 5. This Court, therefore, disposes of the instant writ petition with the following observations and directions:- i) The Respondent Authorities shall verify as to whether the petitioner had successfully executed the said works in question as per the aforementioned work orders. ii) The Respondent Authorities shall also verify as to whether the petitioner had submitted the requisite documents which are required for the purpose of releasing the outstanding amount as claimed by the petitioner. iii) The Respondent Authorities shall also verify the entitlement of the petitioner to the outstanding dues, and if upon verification in the manner stated above, it is found that the petitioner is entitled to the amount claimed or any such amount, the Respondent Authorities shall pay the same to the petitioner. iv) The said exercise be completed within a period of 6 (six) months from the date a certified copy of the instant judgment is served upon the respondent No.2, i.e. the Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Hengrabari, Dispur, Guwahati, Assam.