RAM RATAN PRASAD AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the parties.

(2.) CLAUSE 23 in the agreement dated 4.12.92 provides for arbitration of any dispute between the parties by the Superintending Engineer concerned. On behalf of the opposite parties a counter affidavit was filed enclosing therewith a resolution dated 18.11.92 issued from the Road Construction Department, under which a decision appears to have been taken to delete clause 23 of the agreement prescribed in form F2 of the P.W.D. Code. On behalf of the petitioner a rejoinder has been filed in which it has been alleged that any modification in the form of agreement prescribed by the P.W.D. Code is required to be published in official gazette which has not been done so far and it has further been alleged that the resolution contained in annexure -A was not communicated to the concerned office in the Building Construction Department and therefore the actual agreement signed on 4.12.92 legally and validly contained in clause 23 which provides for arbitration. Sufficient opportunity was given to learned counsel for the State and the opposite parties to file a reply to the said rejoinder or produce before this court a copy of the gazette notification which was directed to be published even under the resolution contained in annexure -A to show that necessary amendment in the P.W.D. Code has been carried out. Inspite of such opportunity no reply has been filed till date nor any gazette notification could be traced out by the opposite parties.

(3.) THE allegation in this application that the opposite parties are not accepting the request of the