IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 4867 of 2024 Chalice Real Estate LLP --- --- Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand and Another --- --- Respondents With W.P. (C) No. 5412 of 2024 Chalice Real Estate LLP --- --- Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand and Another --- --- Respondents With W.P. (C) No. 6288 of 2024 Chalice Real Estate LLP --- --- Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand and Another --- --- Respondents -----

CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD ------

For the Petitioner: Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate For the State: Mr. Ashok Kr. Yadav, Sr.S.C.-I Mr. Abhijeet Anand, A.C. to Sr.S.C.-I Mr. Aditya Kumar, A.C to Sr. S.C-I For Resp. No.2: Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, Sr. Advocate -----

19/ 12.01.2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Today, the matters were posted to enable the learned counsel for the petitioner to argue on the issue of maintainability of these writ petitions.

3. The main argument on behalf of the Respondent RSCCL was that these are contractual disputes for which, the petitioner has other efficacious and alternative remedies. Therefore, this Court, should not exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction and entertain these petitions.

4. It was pointed out to us that under Clause 32.5 of the Jharkhand Smart Cities Land and Other Fixed Assets (Utilization, Allotment and Disposal) Rules, 2019, a mechanism has been provided for settlement of disputes by reference to arbitration by Arbitral Tribunal constituted in accordance with the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended from time to time.

5. Clause 32.5 of the 2019 Rules reads as follows:- “32. Cancellation of allotment, resumption and payments to be made:

32.1 xx xx xx xx. 32.2 xx xx xx xx. 32.3 xx xx xx xx. 32.4 xx xx xx xx.

32.5 RSCCL and the allottee shall initially attempt to settle the issue by reference to Arbitration by an Arbitral Tribunal constituted in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as amended from time to time. The number of Arbitrator shall be Three (3). Each party shall appoint one Arbitrator and the third Arbitrator shall be appointed by the two Arbitrators, who shall act as the Presiding Arbitrator. The place of the arbitration shall be Ranchi, Jharkhand and the language of the arbntiration proceeding shall be in the English language. The cost of arbitration shall be borne by each party equally.”

6. Mr Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instruction, strictly without prejudice to its rights and contentions in these petitions, submitted that the petitioner would agree to resort to arbitration, but stated that this Court should consider whether a Single Member Tribunal should be appointed. Since this was not agreeable to RSCCL, Mr. Indrajit Sinha, again, strictly without prejudice, and on instruction, submitted that the petitioner would resort to arbitration as contemplated under Clause 32.5 before three Member Arbitral Tribunal, so that there is no delay in the adjudication of the dispute, which has arisen between the parties.

7. Mr. Hegde, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of RSCCL, submitted that in these matters, the petitioner had been allotted three plots of land pursuant to a public auction. There were delays in making payments according to the provided schedule. Accordingly, this Court on 3^rd of April, 2025, made the following order: - 1. Affidavits as directed in the previous order passed by this Court have been filed by the respective parties. The Advocate General assures that 95% of the amount deposited by the petitioners would be paid to the petitioners on or before the next date of listing.

2. On such payment, the respondents are permitted to cancel allotment of the subject plots to the respective petitioners and put it for re-

auction.

3. The petitioners shall receive the 95% being offered by the respondents without prejudice to its right to claim the balance 5% as also the int