STATE OF ODISHA Vs. CHOUDHURY NATBAR SAHOO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Das, learned advocate, Additional Standing Counsel appears on behalf of appellant. He submits, the award was made under provisions in Arbitration Act, 1940. State had challenged the award under sec. 33, contending that there was misconduct, as defined in sec. 30. The Court below erred in not appreciating contentions made before it and hence, the appeal.

(2.) He submits, the only point for adjudication of the appeal is that the tribunal applied 1972 schedule of rates in respect of 2nd Running Account (RA) to final bills. He submits, the contract was made on 1/5/1972. Pursuant to respondent having submitted tender on 21/7/1971 per the 1964 schedule of rates. Work order was issued on 26/4/1972. The work was abandoned and the contract closed on 6/7/1974. Respondent raised and obtained payments till 9th RA bill as on 12/7/1974. In the circumstances, respondent having had raised purported claim based on 1972 schedule of rates by letter dtd. 24/5/1974 (marked exhibit 5 in the reference), could not have been favoured with award on basis thereof.

(3.) He relies on order dtd. 1/12/2021 of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal no.7738 of 2011 (Pranab Jyoti Das vs. The General Manager and others), wherefrom paragraphs 4 and 5 are extracted and reproduced below.