Ashwani Kumar v. East Central Railway And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20517 of 2013 ====================================================== Ashwani Kumar S/O Shri Sheo Shankar Pd. Singh R/O- Purani Bijali Colony, Utta Station, P.S. + Dist.- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. East Central Railway, Hajipur, District- Vaishali, Through The General Manager

2. The General Manager, East Central Railaway, Hajipur

3. The Principal Chief Engineer, East Central Railway, Hajipur

4. The Divisional Regional Manager, Danapur, East Central Railway, Danapur

5. Sr. Divisional Engineer (III), East Central Railway, Danapur

6. Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Divisional Engineer III, East Central Railway, Danapur

7. The A.D.E.N./Line, Danapur, East Central Railway, Danapur

8. S.S.E./W/L/East Central Railway, Danapur ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs. Namrata Mishra, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Adv Mr. Yash Mathur , Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 04-12-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the letter no. W-7/05/Misc./DNR/Open/2012-13 dated 12.08.2013, whereby and whereunder the contract agreement no. W7/05/Misc./D.N.R/Open/2012-13 in favour of the petitioner for the work of replacement of PF surface of P.F. No. 01 and 02 at Bihta station has been terminated with effect from 10.12.2012; and for connected reliefs.

Patna High Court CWJC No.20517 of 2013 dt.04-12-2018 2/2

3. At the very outset, this Court takes note that remedy by way of arbitration is available to the petitioner for the relief sought in the writ petition.

4. In that view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter to exercise its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to invoke the arbitration clause for redressal of his grievances. It is made clear that this Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter.

5. It is made clear that in case such an application is filed, the concerned authority would have regard to the present proceeding being pursued by the petitioner while considering any issue relating to condonation of delay, if applicable. (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 07.12.2018 Transmission Date NA