IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18078 of 2010 M/S BANSHI ELECTRIC AND CONSTRUCTION, Ranchi through its Managing Partner B.P. Agrawal S/O Shri Krishna Gopal R/o in front of Imam Kothi, H.B.Road Kokar, P.O &P.S. Kokar, Dist Ranchi, Jharkhand …………………… Petitioner Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA through the General Manager Hajipur Division Railway Bihar. 2. Chief Project Manager, Railway Electrification, Lucknow. 3. Chief Project Manager, Railway Electrification, Hajipur, Bihar. 4. Chief Signal & Telecom Engineer, Central Organization, Railway Electrification, Allahabad. …………………….. Respondents For the Petitioner :- Mr.Hemant Kumar Sharan, Advocate For the Union of India:-Mr. Anil Singh, Advocate ----------- 2. 9.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent, Union of India and the authorities of the Railways Electrification Department. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner which is a contractor challenging the termination notice dated 20.10.2010 (Annexure-8) under the signature of Chief Project Manager, Railway Electrification Hajipur (respondent No. 3) by which the contract given to the petitioner has been rescinded. It is claimed that the said notice was arbitrary and illegal and was issued in 2 the midst of the work which was to be completed by 31.3.2011. By the impugned notice, it was also informed that the security deposit shall be forfeited and performance guarantee shall be encashed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner claims that termination of the contract is premature, done in most arbitrary and whimsical manner and without any rhymes and reasons. 4. The matter arises out of Contract Agreement No. CORE/S&T/Tender/Sig/BJU-MFP- HJP/841A dated 25. 4.2008 between the parties for the work of trenching and laying of underground signaling cables etc., casting of foundations, supply of certain equipmentas well as wiring, testing and commissioning in connection with modification of existing Central Panel at stations, and Modification of MACLS at L.C Gate on Barauni(excl)- Muzaffarpur(incl)-Hajipur(excl) section over East Central Railway under Chief Project Manager Railway Electrification Lucknow to suit 25KV Ac traction with details provided in the said agreement. 3 5. the impugned notice dated 20.10.2008 specifically shows that the contract was rescinded in terms of clause 62 of general conditions of contract and the balance work under the said contract was to be carried out independently without the participation of the petitioner. 6. It is quite apparent that according to agreement between the parties the general condition of contract would be applicable in which there is specific provision of arbitration. Hence, petitioner has an alternative remedy to move for arbitration which appears to be the proper remedy. In the said circumstances, this court does not find it proper to decide the matter in this writ petition as the matter can be legally and properly decided in the said alternative remedy of Arbitration. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy. Furthermore the petitioner will be at liberty to take steps for an interim order before the authority concerned. However, if the 4 petitioner sends a letter to the respondents authority for appointment of Arbitrator, the authority concerned shall pass necessary order in accordance with law immediately without any delay. Prakash (S.N.Hussain, J.)