Government must verify admitted vehicle-hire claims and pay amounts found due upon submission of requisite documents.

The petitioner claimed ownership of thirteen vehicles which had been hired by the respondent authorities on different dates between 2022 and 2024 for emergency purposes, including maintenance of law and order.

The vehicles were subsequently released after use by the authorities.

The petitioner submitted bills totalling ₹82,91,075 before the respondent authorities, but the claimed amount remained unpaid despite repeated approaches.

The respondents stated that, during verification, the petitioner had not submitted updated Registration Certificates, insurance documents, GST (3B) forms, driving licences and declaration certificates, and had been asked to submit the necessary documents for further verification.

The petitioner invoked the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking release of the outstanding vehicle-hire charges.

Whether the petitioner was entitled to payment for the vehicles admittedly hired by the respondent authorities, subject to verification of the claims and supporting documents.

Whether the respondent authorities should be directed to verify the petitioner’s entitlement and release the amount found payable.

The Court applied the principles governing exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in relation to an admitted governmental liability.

It held that where the hiring of the petitioner’s vehicles by the authorities was admitted, the petitioner would be entitled to the amount found due upon proper verification of the claims.

Such verification could validly require production of the relevant Registration Certificates, insurance documents, GST (3B) forms, driving licences and declaration certificates.

The Court treated the respondents’ admission that the vehicles had been hired by the Police Commissionerate as establishing the petitioner’s prima facie entitlement to payment.

However, because the respondents identified deficiencies in the supporting documentation, the Court did not direct immediate payment of the entire amount claimed.

Instead, it required the petitioner to submit the specified documents so that the authorities could verify the bills and determine whether the petitioner was entitled to the full claimed amount or any lesser amount.

The petitioner’s undertaking to submit the documents enabled the Court to dispose of the writ petition with procedural directions rather than adjudicating the precise quantum payable.

The petitioner was directed to submit the Registration Certificates, insurance documents, GST (3B) forms, driving licences, declaration certificates and a certified copy of the judgment to the Director General of Police, Assam.

Upon receipt, the respondents were directed to verify the petitioner’s entitlement and pay the amount found due, whether the full sum claimed or any other amount.

The entire exercise was directed to be completed within six months from the date of submission of the documents and the certified judgment before the Director General of Police.