per the terms of the Contract. In a normal circumstance, on observation on that aspect itself, the parties would be relegated to an appropriate remedy and a writ petition for payment of the amount would not be maintainable. However, learned counsel for the petitioner in the instant facts would submit that the respondent is a Government of India Organisation and it is in that regard, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking for necessary orders. Learned counsel would point out to Clause 51 of the Contract, wherein the process of final payment has been indicated. With reference to the same, the learned counsel would also refer to the document at Page No.300 of the writ petition wherein certain observations of the Law Officer of the respondents citing Item 64 (2) of the General Conditions of the Contract has been indicated. It is contended that the Law Officer himself has taken note that the payment cannot be withheld merely because arbitral proceedings are pending, but has thereafter indicated that the amount would be paid only if the arbitral proceedings are withdrawn. It is contended that such stand taken by the respondents is unfair and therefore when the respondent is a Government of India undertaking, this
