Data Technosys Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4041 of 2015 ===========================================================

1. Data Technosys ( Engineers) Pvt. Ltd., Asha Apartment (I), 19 Ram Mohan Rai (Lucknow through its legal representative Sandeep Saxena son of Late K.C. Saxena resident of C-740, Sector C, Mahanagar Lucknow .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Union of India through the General Manager East Central Railway Hazipur, Bihar

2. The General Manager, East Central Railway, Hazipur

3. The Chief Engineer (Construction), East Central Railway, Patna

4. The Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) East Railway, Patna

5. The Chief Engineer (Construction), Jharkhand East Central Railway, Mahendrughat, Patna

6. The Chief Administrative Officer (Construction) East Central Railway, Mahendru Ghat, Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha Mr. Abhimanyu Deo =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 09-12-2016 Heard Mr. Mishra for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha for the East Central Railways (for short "ECR"). Petitioner was awarded survey work of PET survey for doubling (3rd line) of Buxar-Ara- Mokama Section. As the petitioner defaulted in discharge of the responsibility arising out of the contract entered between them, the respondents rescinded/terminated the contract on 28.04.2011. Raising a grievance thereagainst, the petitioner filed a writ petition in this Court which was disposed of vide order dated 17.02.2014 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3012 of 2014

Patna High Court CWJC No.4041 of 2015 dt.09-12-2016 2/3 (Annexure-37) permitting the petitioner to make a representation which was directed to be considered and disposed of by a speaking order. In consequence thereof, the petitioner made an application which was considered and rejected vide communication dated 28.08.2014 which is enclosed along with Annexure-38. Diverse submissions have been advanced on behalf of the petitioner to assail the said order. It is submitted that the communication of the Deputy Chief Engineer at Annexure-36 was not taken into account by the respondent ECR while passing the speaking order.

Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, on the other hand, submits that any difference or dispute arising out of or in connection with the contract can be resolved through the arbitral proceeding as provided in Clauses 63 and 64 of the General Conditions of Contract (GCC). On a consideration of the submissions, in my view, the ends of justice shall be sub-served if the petitioner is granted a liberty to invoke the relevant clause of the GCC for seeking arbitral resolution of the dispute.

Let the petitioner approach the appropriate authority of the respondent ECR for reference of the matter to the arbitrator. Once such application is filed, the respondent will consider the same and do the needful as required by them as quickly as possible preferably

Patna High Court CWJC No.4041 of 2015 dt.09-12-2016 3/3 within 30 days of such presentation/filing.

The writ application is disposed off.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Pankaj/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 13.12.2016 Transmission Date