IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 7816 of 2008 Between: M/s. PCL-STICCO (J.V ), Having its registered Office, At 7th Floor, Raghava North Block, Raghava Ratna Tower, Chirag-Ail-Lane, Hyd. Rep. by Authorised Mr. Maduri. Madhsudhan. ..... PETITIONER AND 1)National Highways ASuthority of India, ( Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and highways), G-5 and 6, Sector-10, Dwaraka, New Delhi- 110 075 rep. by its General Manager ( C.K.II ). 2) Indusind Bank Ltd., Secunderabad Branch, " LAXMI ", 100, S.P.Road, Begumpet, Secunderabad. Rep. by its Branch Manager, 3) DHV Construction, Supervision Consultants, A1-DURA, Pathasa, Gopalapur Road, Bahadurpeta P.O., Ganjam District-760 007, Orissa State, Rep. by its Team Leader. 4)State Bank of Hyd., Industrial Finance Branch, Gunfoundry, Hyd. Rep. by its Branch Manager. 5) State Bank of Hyd., Begumpet Branch, Hyd., Rep. by its Branch Manager,. 6) Vijaya Bank, Ameerpet Branch, Hyd. Rep. by its Branch Manager. 7)Bank of India, Khairathabad Branch, Hyd., Rep. by its Branch Manager. 8)Andra Bank, Sultan Bazar Branch, Hyd. Rep. by its Branch Manager. 9)ICICI Bank, Begumpet Branch, Hyd., Rep. by its Branch Manager. .....RESPONDENTS 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 appropriate order direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the 1s t respondent issuing proceedings NHA1/12013/14/2006/TECH/CK-II/38 to 45 dated 3-4-2008 firstly invoking the sub-clause 63.1(d) of GCC ( General Conditions of the Contract ) and the order of expulsion expressed therein and the action of the 1st respondent is arbitrary and illegal and invocation of the bank guarantees given by the petitioner to the 1st respondent is arbitrary, unreasonable and is violative of the constitutional mandatred under article 14 of the constitution apart from being in Violation of the terms of the contract dated 20-8-2001 and even otherwise, the saidcontrat having bacomefrustrated and viod and the invocation of the guarantees being inviolation of the terms and conditions of the respective bank guarantees and also vitied by fraud in the execrise of the powetr of invocaction conferresd inder the terms of the bank guarantee and without taking into consideration the special equities in favour of the petitioner and particularly the pendency of the arbitration and other proceedings and the sudden coercive action against the petitioner is violative of Art. 14,20 and 300A of the constitution of India and obnoxious of the fundamental Principles of natural justice and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.THANNIRU SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent No.: M.V.KINI&CO.ADVOCATES& SOLICITORS The Court made the following : ORDER: Sri T.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner filed a letter in the registry seeking permission of the court to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to institute fresh proceedings in proper forum having jurisdiction. Accordingly, permission is granted and the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. No costs. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.19.2.2009 msv