Petitioner sought withdrawal of writ petition with liberty to pursue arbitration or civil remedy. The High Court allowed withdrawal and dismissed the petition as withdrawn.
Withdrawal of writ petition allowed with liberty to pursue alternative remedies including arbitration or civil court proceedings.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 13079 of 2007
Between:
M/s. Maruthi Constructions, Bharathi Nagar, Vijayawada, rep. by its Managing Partner, Sri D.N.Prasad, S/o.Bheemaiah, 62 Years.
..... PETITIONER
AND
1 The Prl., Secretary to Government Transport, R&B, Dept., Government of A.P., Secretariat, Saifabad.
2 the Superintending Engineer, R&B Dept., Guntur.
3 Executive Engineer, R&B Dept., Guntur.
.....RESPONDENT(S)
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropirate writ or direction particuarlly in thenatureof writof Mandmaus, declaring the inertin and inactionon thepart of the Principal Secretarya to Government Transport, R&B Dept., Govt of A.p., Hyderabadin Non-consideration and disposal of the petitioners claim for price adjustmentfor the amounts detailed in the statement annexed to representatin dt. 9.4.2007 in Terms of G.O.Ms.No.35, dt. 28.2.2006 as illegal, arbitrary, improper, unklawful and opposed to the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to consider the calims of the petitioner for price adjustment in terms of the statement annexed to the representation dt. 9.4.2007 in terms of G.O.ms.No.35 by holding that the price adjustment towards price escalation would be applicable to all the contracts inhering subsistence of performance guarantee period posterior to the completion of the work involving withholding of the security deposit and other dues and accordingly suitable orders may be directed to be issued for settlement of the claims of the petitioner and grant other suitable reliefs as are deemed fit and proper.
Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.V.J.K.KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR TRANSPORT
The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM
W.P.No. 13079 of 2007
14-07-2009
Oral Order:
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wants to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to pursue alternative remedies including arbitration before an Arbitrator if there be an arbitration clause under the contract between the parties or before a civil Court of competent jurisdiction in the absence of an arbitration clause. Granting such a liberty as sought, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J
Dated: 14-07-2009 Pvks
M/s. Maruthi Constructions
Principal Secretary to Government Transport, R&B Dept., Government of A.P.
Superintending Engineer, R&B Dept., Guntur
Executive Engineer, R&B Dept., Guntur
Goda Raghuram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
