Dillip Ku.Brahma v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P (C) No. 18845 of 2016 Dillip Kumar Brahma .....

Petitioner Mr. R. Roy, Advocate.

Vs.

State of Odisha and others .....

Opposite parties Mr. P.P. Mohanty, AGA

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

ORDER

03.03.2022 Order No.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2.

Heard Mr. R. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.P. Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate. 3.

The petitioner files this application challenging the letter dated 06.06.2011, 04.06.2012, 22.06.2015 and 19.08.2015 under Annexures-2, 3, 14 and 17 of the writ petition and seeking direction to the opposite parties to close the contract executed with the petitioner without any penalty and also to release his withheld dues with interest.

4.

In Course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in Clause-24 of the conditions of the contract, provision of Dispute Redressal System, is available, to which Mr. P.P. Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate has no objection.

5.

Needless to say that in the counter affidavit filed by the opposite parties, they have also indicated that if the petitioner is aggrieved, he should approach before the dispute redressal mechanism.

6.

In view of the above, this writ petition stands disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to pursue his remedy in terms of Clause-24 of the conditions of the contract, in accordance with law, if he is so advised.

Arun (DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE (V. NARASINGH) JUDGE