GAJO SAHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the parties.

(2.) PETITIONER has challenged the order as contained in letter No. 609 dated 26.11.2001 issued under the signature of Executive Engineer, Sichai Pramandal, Littipara, Pakur, whereby petitioners agreement for construction of Check Dam (C.D.) of Chain No. 826 of the Main Canal on Gumani River under the Gumani Barrage Scheme/project has been terminated.

(3.) IN the Instant case, the petitioner has annexed a copy of the agreement as Annexure 2 to the writ application. This agreement shows various terms and conditions including remedy for claiming compensation in case of termination or cancellation of contract and further in case of dispute, invoking jurisdiction of arbitrator for adjudication of the claim. The Supreme Court in one case has also laid down the law that if the agreement be it a statutory or non -statutory contains Arbitration Clause then the High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In this connection reference may be made to the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Birsa Stone Line Co. Ltd. and Anr. v. Orissa State Electricity Board and Anr., AIR 1976 SC 127.