IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9382 of 2011 Chankya Technos Pvt. Ltd. through its Director Ravi Shankar Pathak, son of Late Hari Shankar Pathak, Shiv Kripa House No. 23, Road No. D, Shivpuri, Patna. …… Petitioner. Versus 1. General Manager East Central Railway, Hazipur. 2. Deputy Chief Engineer Cont/ South, East Central Railway, Dighaghat. 3. C.A.O. Construction South Mahendru Ghat Patna. 4. Cheif Engineer, Ganga Bridge, Mahendru Ghat, Patna. ….. Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Buxis S.R.P. Sinha, Senior Advocate with Mr. Binod Kumar Yadav, Advocate. For the respondents : Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, Advocate. -------- 02.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging order dated 15.03.2011 by which the Deputy Chief Engineer (Con) G.B., E.C. Railway Dighaghat, Patna has directed the different High Officials of all the Railways to recover Rs.88,48,061.40 from the dues of the petitioner, if any, with them. It is also stated that the aforesaid dues was claimed by the respondents by way of risk and cost amount as per the failure of the contractor in completing the work, namely linking of track, points and crossing of other P. Way Work and supply of ballast between Danapur, Phulwarisharif & Digha (New Line) in connection with construction of Ganga Rail Bridge, Patna. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter is pending for arbitration before the Tribunal and without - 2 - giving any counter claim respondent no.3 has issued the impugned order for recovery of the amount. Hence, he prays for permission to withdraw this writ petition with permission to raise this issue also before the arbitral Tribunal. 4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. However, petitioner must file an application in the said arbitral proceeding on the next date fixed, i.e.13.09.2011 along with a copy of this order raising the dispute and the said Tribunal shall consider the entire matter and take appropriate decision in accordance with law. If the petitioner requires any interim order he will be at liberty to approach the arbitral Tribunal for the said purpose which should be decided at the earliest. Sunil (S. N. Hussain, J.)