The main legal point established in the judgment is that the availability of an alternative remedy, such as an arbitration clause in an agreement, does not render a writ petition 'not maintainable' and that the court has the discretion to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.

This is one of the glaring cases where, by single stroke of a pen, construction work of Bus Stand, Barchhwar, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, awarded to the petitioner, was stopped by the respondents as far as back on 12.4.2013 vide Annexure P8 and the same despite being of great public utility has still not been resumed.

2. What is even more shocking is that no enquiry was held in the matter, even though the evident reason as set out in the communication dated 12.4.2013 for stopping the construction work of the bus stand was that the then Transport Minister had desired that an enquiry as to the deviations of quality work be conducted by the Executive Engineer level Officer. Though, ironically even the amount spent by the petitioner on the construction work has even been paid to him.

3. It is in this background that the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition for grant of the following substantive reliefs:

1. A writ in the nature certiorari may very kindly be issued and impugned letter dated 12.4.2013 as contained in Annexure P-8 may very kindly be quashed and set aside.

2. That this Hon’ble Court may very kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to immediately issue the orders of resumption of work by the petitioner at bus stand Barchwar, Tehsil Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. as per the letter of award dated 16th June, 2012 (Annexure P-1).

3. That the respondents may very kindly be directed to pay damages to the tune of Rs.10,000/- per day and Rs.12,000/- per month separately for the salary of two Chowkidars.

4. That the respondents may further be directed to renegotiate the terms of the contract with the petitioner, keeping in view of the escalation of costs, which has resulted from the illegal commissions on the part of the respondents.

4. The respondents in their reply have raised preliminary objection regarding non-maintainability of the instant writ petition on the ground of there being an arbitration clause in the award contract. As regards factual averments, the same have not been seriously disputed by the respondents.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the material placed on record carefully.

6. Adverting to the preliminary objections regarding non-maintainability of the instant writ petition on the ground of there being an arbitration clause in the agreement in question, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India and others vs. Tantia Construction Private Limited (2011) 5 SCC 697, while making observation on arbitration clause held that it is now well settled that an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the invocation of the writ jurisdiction of the High Court or the Supreme Court and that without exhausting such alternative remedy, writ petition would be maintainable. It is further held that injustice whenever and wherever takes place, has to be struck down as an anathema to the rule of law and the provisions of the Constitution. The relevant observation reads thus:

“33. Apart from the above, even on the question of maintainability of the writ petition on account of the Arbitration Clause included in the agreement between the parties, it is now well-established that an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the invocation of the writ jurisdiction of the High Court or the Supreme Court and that without exhausting such alternative remedy, a writ petition would not be maintainable. The various decisions cited by Mr. Chakraborty would clearly indicate that the constitutional powers vested in the High Court or the Supreme Court cannot be fettered by any alternative remedy available to the authorities. Injustice, whenever and wherever it takes place, has to be struck down as an anathema to the rule of law and the provisions of the Constitution.”

7. In M/s Ram Barai Singh & Co. vs. State of Bihar & ors. JT 2014 (14) SC 357 the Hon’ble Supreme Court set aside the order passed by the Division Ben