SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Telangana) 161

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 - Respondents
W.P.No.24408 of 2021
Decided on : 24-03-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. A. Venkatesh
For the Respondents: Mr A.Sanjeev Kumar

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 - Articles 14,21, 19(1) (g),300A, 226 and 12 - Construction of Head Sluice including Surplus arrangements - Handing over of encumbrance free land - Head Sluice including Surplus arrangements - Tank with a carrying capacity for an ayacut of Acres at Head Regulator including Earth work Excavation and forming Embankment - Held, Petitioner who is counterparty to the agreement entered into by and between petitioner and Respondents duly applying bring about a suitable amendment to designate International Arbitration and Mediation Centre (IAMC) Hyderabad as Arbitral Mediation Institution to utilize the services of IAMCH for conducting their arbitration relating to all disputes between the petitioner and the respondents herein arising out of Contract vide agreement - Petitions disposed off.

ORDER :

Heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri A. Venkatesh appearing for the petitioner and the Special Government Pleader Sri. A.Snajeev Kumar appearing on behalf of the Respondents.

2. The Main Prayer sought for by the Petitioner:

    “to issue a Writ or an Order or a Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the Respondent No.5 in issuing tender notice No. 06/2021 dt. 17.09.2021 published in newspaper Namaste Telangana dt. 25.09.2021 vide proceedings No. DIPR RO. No. 16305-PP/CL/Advt/1/2021-22 dt. 24.09.2021 for the project JCRDLS. Phase III, Package No. VI for the balance work: (1) Improvements to Palakurthy Tank near Palakurthy (V&M). Jangaon District for a capacity of 0.25 TMC, Construction of Head Sluice including Surplus arrangements. (2). Improvements to Chennur Tank near Chennur (V). Palakurthy (M), Jangaon District for a capacity of 0.58 TMC, Construction of Head Sluice including Surplus arrangements. (3) Execution of Main Canal from Nashkal Tank to Palakurthy Tank with a carrying capacity for an ayacut of 52.725 Acres at Head Regulator including Earth work Excavation and forming Embankment. Construction of CD & CM works and cement concrete lining up to 1 Cumec discharge for Main Canal, Distributaries, Minors and Sub- Minors to provide Irrigation potential of 45.210 Acres under Naskhal Tank, 7,515 Acres under Palakurthy Tank and 25,165 Acres under Chennur Tank for an amount of Rs. 378.35.39.120/- contrary to G.O.Ms.No.23 dt.24.06.2021, wherein the ongoing irrigation projects were given extension of time, including the work undertaken by the petitioner in package VI, Phase-lll of JCR-DIS placed at Sl.No.34 of the annexure in the above G.O as illegal. arbitrary and violative of Articles 14. Article 21. Article 19(1) (g) and Article 300A of the Constitution of India and violative of the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same, pending the disposal of the above writ petition.”

PERUSED THE RECORD

3. Interim Orders of this court in connected W.P. No. 24761 of 2021 dated 04.10.2021 read as under:

    “Learned Additional Advocate General takes notice on behalf of the respondents and seeks time to file counter.

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:

    “The India's First International Arbitration and Mediation Centre at Hyderabad (IAMCH) has been set up by the International Arbitration and Mediation Centre Trust (IAMC Trust), Hyderabad, a public charitable trust declared by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India under a Trust Deed first read above, executed on 20th August, 2021, to promote various types of alternate dispute resolution (ADR), in particular arbitration, mediation and conciliation, which would provide an effec

            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
            1
            2
            3
            4
            5
            6
            7
            8
            9
            10
            11
            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
            supreme today icon
            logo-black

            An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

            Please visit our Training & Support
            Center or Contact Us for assistance

            qr

            Scan Me!

            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

            whatsapp-icon Back to top