IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
M/s SEW Kranthi JV – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana and others – Respondent
W.P.No.24761 of 2021
Decided on : 24-03-2023
Constitution of India,1950 - Articles 226, 300A , 14, 21 and 19(1) (g) - Termination of contract - Denying the payment - Respondent has specifically mentioned that petitioner is entitled for payment petitioner is liable to pay an amount Department - He expresses his apprehension that respondents may withhold an amount crores which is due to petitioner by 3 respondent which is pending bill - Held, Policy for implementing which such discretion has been conferred - In all such cases and in any other fit and proper case a High Court can, in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226, issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in nature of mandamus or pass orders and give directions to compel performance in a proper and lawful manner of the discretion conferred upon government or a public authority, and in a proper case, in order to prevent injustice resulting to the concerned parties - Petitions disposed off
ORDER :
Heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri A. Venkatesh appearing for the petitioner and the Special Government Pleader Sri A.Sanjeev Kumar appearing on behalf of the Respondents.
2. The Main Prayer sought for by the Petitioner:
PERUSED THE RECORD
3. Interim Orders of this court in connected W.P. No. 24761 of 2021 dated 04.10.2021 read as under:
List on 21.10.2021 along with W.P.Nos.8906 and 21122 of 2021.
In the impugned order dated 30.08.2021, the 3rd respondent has specifically mentioned that the petitioner is entitled for payment of Rs.15,87,86,155/- and that the petitioner is liable to pay an amount of Rs.28,07,60,001/- to the Department.
Sri B. Chandrasen Reddy, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the 3 respondent is going to take steps pursuant to the impugned order dated 30.08.2021. He expresses his apprehension that the respondents may withhold an amount of Rs.25 crores which is due to the petitioner by the 3 respondent which is pending bill and EMD of Rs.8 crores.
Learned Addl. Advocate General, on instructions, would submit that since there is an arbitration clause and it is an arbitral dispute, the petitioner has to invoke the same. Instead of doing so, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition which is not maintainable.
In view of the same, matter requires examination.
Therefore, the 3rd respondent is directed not to take further steps pursuant to notice dated 30.08.2021.”
4. G.O.Ms.No.6 dated 17.03.2022 issued by the Government of Telangana, Law (E) Department, reads as under:
2. A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) second read above has been entered between the Government of Telangana and the International Arbitration and Mediation Centre Trust (IAMC Trust) on 27.10.2021.
3. According to Clause-5 (IACH's Case Management Services) of the Memorandum of Understanding, Government hereby direct all the Ministries, Departments, Public Sector Companies, and other entities controlled or managed by the Government of Telangana:
(i) to designate IAMCH as the arbitral/mediation institution in all their contracts, agreements, purchase orders, etc. (Contracts) having value of more than Rs.3 crores (Rupees three crores only) and containing an arbitration clause;
(ii) In respect of subsisting Contracts of value of more than Rs.10 crores (Rupees ten crores only) to discuss with the counterparty
Comptroller and Audit General of India, Gian Prakash
Harbanslal Sahnia vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (2003) 2 SCC 107
Modern Steel Industries vs. State of U.P. and others (2001) 10 SCC 491
Union of India and others v Tantia Construction Private Limited
Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is also a Court of Equity It will have to be mindful of interests of justice and ensure that in rigidly applying technical....
The court emphasized the importance of honoring contractual agreements and the need for parties to adhere to the terms of the contract. It also highlighted the significance of approaching the compete....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the dispute fell within the ambit of the arbitration clause in the contract and that the public law remedy was not required as an effective pr....
Point of Law : Parliament in exercise of powers as conferred therein enacted an Act by the name in the nomenclature of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in order to consolidate and amend the law....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.