Court No. - 4
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11012 of 2018 Petitioner :- M/S R.R. Contractor Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prem Sagar Verma,Narendra Mohan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pranjal Mehrotra,Sujeet Kumar
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Sri Om Kumar Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3 to 7.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-
“i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the balance amount with 12% interest of work carried out by the petitioner before this hon'ble court with in stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble court.
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents to submit the bills of balance amount of work carried out by the petitioner before this hon'ble court with in stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble court.”
A preliminary objection has been raised by the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 to 7 that the petitioner by means of this writ petition has raised a purely civil dispute arising out of a non statutory obligation. The remedy of the petitioner, if he is aggrieved by the non-payment, is to either file an ordinary civil suit or if there is arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties, to invoke the terms of the same. In support of the aforesaid contention he has placed reliance upon two reported Division Bench Judgments of this Court passed in WRIT-C No. 11544 of 2014 (M/S R.S. Associate Thru' Prop. Reeta Singh vs. State of U.P. & Others) and in WRIT-C No. 20399 of 2016 (M/S Prem Chandra Contractor vs. State of U.P. & 2 Ors.).
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the averments made in the writ petition and two Division Bench decision of this Court cited before us by the learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 to 7, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to pursue any other remedy, if available under law.
Order Date :- 30.3.2018 Pkb/