WP(C) 4106/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. Goswami, learned senior counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Saikia, learned standing counsel, PWD appearing for all the respondents. As agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties this writ petition i s taken up for disposal at the motion stage itself. The petitioner, by the present petition, has challenged the order dated 10.6.2011 passed by the Executive Engineer, PWD Lakhimpur State Road Division, t he respondent No. 4. One of the grounds on which the said order of termination o f the contract has been challenged is that before passing such order no notice w as ever issued to the petitioner. It appears that in the contract executed between the parties there is an in-house procedure for resolution of the dispute in Clause 24.1. The petitioner is yet to approach the authority for redressal of the dispute in terms of the p rovision contained in the contract i.e. Clause 24.1. Clause 24.1 of the contract reads as follows: - \24. Dispute Redressal System 24.1 If any dispute or difference of any kind what-so-ever shall arises in connection with or arising out of this Contract or the execution of Works or maintenance of the Works there under, whether before its commencement or during the progress of Works or after the termination, abandonment or breach of the Con tract, it shall, in the first instance, be referred for settlement to the compet ent authority, described along with their powers in the Contract Data, above the rank of the Engineer. The competent authority shall, within a period of forty-f ive days after being requested in writing by the Contractor to do so, convey his decision to the Contractor. Such decision in respect of every matter so referre d shall, subject to review as hereinafter provided, be final and binding upon th e Contractor. In case the Works is already in progress, the Contractor shall pro ceed with the execution of the Works, including maintenance thereof, pending rec eipt of the decision of the competent authority as aforesaid, with all due dilig ence.\ In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of giving liberty t o the petitioner to approach the authority concerned for redressal of the disput e through in-house system as provided in Clause 24.1 of the Contract executed be tween the parties. In the event any such approach is made by the petitioner, necessary foll ow up action shall be taken by the authority concerned.