SNEHLATA CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNDISPUTEDLY , petitioner was awarded a contract for widening and hot mixing Bageshwar Kapkot Saon motor road by PWD; an agreement was executed between the petitioner and PWD on 24.02.2010; some dispute arose between petitioner, herein and PWD pertaining to the execution and breach of contract; meanwhile, Department has decided to recover Rs. 64,32,493/ - towards damages from the petitioner; petitioner requested the Department to refer the matter to the Arbitrator, as per arbitration clause in the agreement; petitioner moved an application under Section 11 (5) read with Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before this Court and this Court vide judgment dated 02.07.2014 was pleased to appoint Hon ble Mr. Justice Irshad Hussain, former Judge of this Court, as sole arbitrator; matter is still sub judiced before the learned Arbitrator wherein learned Arbitrator has to adjudicate as to whether petitioner is guilty of breach of contract or Department has to pay damages to the petitioner for the lapses on the part of the Department; petitioner was arrested on the FIR lodged by the Department wherein petitioner was directed to be released on bail, on a condition to deposit Rs. 17,00,000/ - with the Department; petitioner deposited Rs. 17,00,000/ - with the Department, as pre condition of the bail; without waiting for the final adjudication in the arbitration proceedings, Department has decided to proceed to recover the balance amount against the petitioner, therefore, a public notice was got issued for auction of the property of petitioner for recovery of the amount.

(2.) THE sole question involved in the present writ petition, is as to whether Department can be permitted to recover the amount of damages from the petitioner during the pendency of reference before the learned Arbitrator? Since the only question of law is involved in the present writ petition, therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, present petition is heard finally, at the admission stage and is being disposed of today itself.

(3.) IT is an admitted fact that matter is sub judiced before the learned Arbitrator appointed by this Court wherein he has to adjudicate as to whether petitioner is guilty of breach of contract or Department is liable to pay damages for the losses suffered by the petitioner on account of certain lapses on the part of the Department.