JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal questions the correctness of the judgment dated 9th of January, 2018 passed in CWJC No. 12906 of 2016 whereby the prayer of the petitioner seeking payment at the prevailing rates of the year 2012 for the excess of the contracted quantity under the agreement which entered in the year 2007 for the construction of the barrage and other allied works over Phalgu River has been declined to be entertained in the writ jurisdiction with liberty to the petitioner to invoke arbitration for the settlement of the claim of such payment. The petitioner has basically challenged the action of the respondents to be contrary to the recommendations of the competent authorities and the ultimate decisions of the State Government not to make the payments being without jurisdiction.

2. In short, the contention is that the proceedings undertaken by the respondents being without jurisdiction, the action of the State is arbitrary thereby violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, the writ petition was entertainable in view of the three exceptions carved out in the decisions of Whirl Pool Corporation vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and Others reported in (19