CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 13363 OF 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: July 28, 2009. Parties Name M/S Vishesh Kumar Contractors ..PETITIONER VERSUS State of Punjab and others ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH PRESENT: Mr. Anil Khettarpal, Adv., for Mr. J.S.Puri, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Sharma, Addl. A.G., Punjab Mr. R.S.Bains, Advocate; JASBIR SINGH, J. (oral) Order. This writ petition has been filed to lay challenge to the letter dated April 4, 2008 (P-10) issued by respondent No. 3, directing the Superintending Engineer, Construction Circle, PWD(B&R) Branch of the State of Punjab, Chandigarh, and all Executive Engineers (Civil) of the Punjab Mandi Board, asking them to deduct an amount of Rs. 10,40,000/- from any payment, to be made to the petitioner. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner was allotted work vide letter dated July 20, 2004, for execution of improvement of existing road CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 13363 OF 2008 -2- Singhpur to Bhaddi (Total length 10.675 KMs). As per contract agreement , in case of dispute, provision has been made for arbitration. It is case of the petitioner that he completed the work and submitted final bill on March 18, 2005. The requisite amount was also paid to him. Thereafter, on a complaint made by some officer of the Mandi Board, an enquiry was conducted by Vigilance Department of State of Punjab but no defect was detected in work executed by the petitioner. This assertion has been controverted by counsel for the respondents. Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that in the contract agreement, it is provided that the respondents will be at liberty to indicate the defect, if any, in execution of the work, within a period of one year. As per averments made in this writ petition, by letter dated May 2, 2005, the respondents indicated some defect in the work executed by the petitioner and the petitioner by writing letter dated May 25, 2005, stated that necessary compliance was being made for rectification of the defects. It is case of the petitioner that as per terms of the respondents, defects were removed. Subsequent thereto on March 23, 2006, again letter was sent to the petitioner by the respondents stating that despite request made, defects have not been removed. Amount, to be spent for the above said purpose was assessed at Rs. 2,50,000/- and bank guarantee to the extent of that amount was encashed by the respondents. Thereafter, it appears that after writing some letters to petitioner, the respondents issued letter (P-10) stating that an amount of Rs. 10,40,000/-is needed to remove the defects indicated by the respondents. It is an admitted fact that before making assessment of amount, no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner. There is serious CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 13363 OF 2008 -3- dispute on facts, which can be resolved only in terms of the arbitration clause, existing in the contract agreement. Shri Bains very fairly states that in case any dispute is raised, the Punjab Mandi Board shall immediately refer the matter for arbitration as per provisions of the contract agreement. In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to raise dispute for arbitration within 15 days. If he does so, the respondents are directed to refer the matter for arbitration as per terms and conditions of the contract agreement within next 15 days. It is made clear that till such time award is given by the Arbitrator, additional amount, beyond Rs. 2,50,000/-, claimed by the respondents shall not be recovered from the petitioner. It is further directed that if the respondents wish to black list the petitioner for the purpose of executing any work, the Secretary of the Mandi Board shall pass a speaking order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. July 28, 2009 ( Jasbir Singh ) DKC Judge