SWADHI HEALTH MANAGEMENT LLP Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant Intra-Court Mandamus Appeal arises in respect of a judgment and order dtd. 29/8/2025, passed by a learned Single Judge in WP. (C) No. 04 of 2023. By the impugned judgment and order, the First Court disposed of the matter in the following manner:-

(2.) Before us the learned Advocate representing the appellant submits that the learned Single Judge had misdirected herself by holding that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Gunwant Kaur and Ors. Vs. Municipal Committee, Bhatinda and Ors. reported at AIR 1970 SC 802 (Page 53) was not applicable by stating that the facts therein are distinguishable from the case before her. We requested the learned Advocate for the appellant to place the relevant paragraph which he intended to rely upon in order to submit that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was factually akin to the case which is now before this Court.

(3.) In this regard, he placed paragraph 14 of the said judgment. We have perused the paragraph 14 of the judgment and we have also read the Hon'ble Surpreme Court's judgment rendered in Smt. Gunwant Kaur case in its entirety. We have no hesitation to hold that the matter before the Hon'ble Supreme is fully distinguishable on facts as well as law from the case before us. There was no existence of any arbitration clause which governed the parties in Smt. Gunwant Kaur's case, whereas it is undisputed that there exists an arbitration clause which governs the parties before us. That apart and in any event, in Gunwant Kaur's case, the High Court had proceeded to dismiss the writ petition in limine where as in the facts of this case, the learned Single Judge has delivered an exhaustive judgment running into 19 pages while giving her reasons as to why the writ Court was loathed to entertain the writ petition on merit while giving liberty to the writ petitioners to take recourse to the remedy of the arbitration.