ORDER :

1. The petitioner No.1 being a Public Limited Company has filed this petition with the following prayers:

“10(a) The Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing the respondent herein to reconnect the bulk water supply to the unit of petitioner No.1 herein at Mundra, Kutch, with immediate effect.

(b) The Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned letter dated 24.1.2023 at Annexure P/1, whereby, GWIL has communicated to disconnect the bulk water supply to the Mundra Unit of petitioner No.1 herein, which was being supplied hitherto since the year 2008-2009.”

2. The facts in brief are as under:

* It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioner No.1 company is manufacturing carbon black which is the basic raw material for manufacture of tyres. One of the plants is situated at Mundra. The plant was established in the year 2008-09. According to the petitioners, the manufacturing process of carbon black is a continuous process which is water intensive. Therefore, the State government as a part of its Industrial policy to ensure adequate water supply, through the Gujarat Water Infrastructure Limited (for short, hereinafter referred to as `the GWIL’) respondent No.1 has provided for supply of such water.

* It is the case of the petitioners that on 24.1.2008, a company under respondent No.1 entered into an agreement for bulk water supply. The initial agreement was for a period of five years. It contained a renewal clause stipulating that the agreement can be renewed at the end of five year term for successive term of ten years. Under the agreement, the respondent GWIL was required to supply a monthly amount of water equally a minimum of 0.20 MLD. According to the petitioner, the supply by a subsequent agreement was increased to 0.80 MLD. The contract was renewed on 16.12.2014 effective from 21.4.2014. In accordance with the terms of the agreement, the petitioner was sanctioned to withdraw 1.75 MLD of water. In clause 2 of the agreement, it was specifically stated that the purchaser will purchase a monthly quantity of water that equals the minimum quantity which shall be 80% of the sanctioned quantity i.e. 1400 MLD. It appears that according to the master agreement, according to the petitioners, clause 3.2 thereof provided that the petitioners will purchase a monthly amount of water that equals to the minimum quantity of 0.20 MLD and maximum of 0.52 MLD.

* Terms of the master agreement including clause 5.6 and clause 13.4 thereof provided that the purchaser shall pay for the minimum quantity of water specified in clause 3.2 as the case may be irrespective of the consumption or non consumption of the said amount of water.

* Clause 13.4 provided that in the event the bulk supplier i.e. the respondent was unable to supply the minimum quantity of water, the purchaser will be given a choice of either to receive free of cost within four months consecutive billing cycles the quantity of water or receive credit etc.

* According to the petitioners, on several occasions when the GWIL was not able to supply minimum quantity of water as agreed, GWIL was raising bills only as per actual quantity of water supplied and not as per the minimum quantity of water supplied. According to the petitioners, this was in violation of the agreement and was conveyed to the respondent by letter dated 9.4.2021. A refusal of the GWIL to revise the bills led to a dispute and since the respondent threatened to discontinue the water supply, the petitioners were compelled to pay the entire amounts. For the resolution of the dispute, seeking recourse to the arbitration clause under the agreement an arbitrator was appointed as a result of an order of this Court dated 16.12.2022.

* A subsequent renewal was made for a further period o