VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J

1. This judgment will dispose of a batch of writ petitions. The parties have agreed that the civil writ petition No.9178/2009 be treated as the lead case and accordingly, the said case was argued. The issues as raised in the other cases are identical and facts are more or less similar.

2. The following issues have been raised by the petitioner:

"A. Price Variation Clause

1. Whether the Price Variation Clause (PVC) as adopted in CS 156 of 2005 was faulty?

2. Whether the Petitioners are entitled to the new PVC as recommended by the Committee on 19.09.2007

B +/-30 Option Clause

Whether the Respondent Authorities could have invoked the +/-30 Option Clause at the end of contract period?"

The aforesaid issues arise on the basis of the following facts:

The petitioner was awarded the contract by the respondent No.3/Indian Railways, being CS 156/05, in the year 2005 for the supply of concrete sleepers by the petitioner to the respondent No.3. The petitioner has stated that for manufacture of the sleepers, respondent No.3 had leased out its land on which the petitioner set up a unit for production of concrete sleepers. Admittedly, the petitioner failed to adhere to the ti