IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4838 of 2011 M/S SOFTLINE MEDIA LTD., NEW DELHI, A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 38, RANI JHANSI ROAD, POST BOX 5711, NEW DELHI-110055 THROUGH MANAGING DIRECTOR RAKESH GUPTA SON OF SRI ISHWAR CHAND GUPTA, RESIDENT OF 38, RANI JHANSI ROAD, P.S. JHANDEWAL, POST BOX 5711, NEW DELHI-110055……..PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY-CUM-COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE STATE HEALTH SOCIETY, A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1860 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT PARIWAR KALYAN BHAWAN, SHEIKHPURA, PATNA THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. 3. THE SECRETARY, HEALTH-CUM-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, STATE HEALTH SOCIETY, PARIWAR KALYAN BHAWAN, SHEIKHPURA, PATNA. 4. ASHRAF KHAN S/O RAMJAN KHAN, R/O MOHALLA KACHI SARAI, P.S. MITHANPURA, DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR, BIHAR…………………………..RESPONDENTS. For the petitioner : Mr. N.K. Malhotra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Mrigank Mauli, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Singh, AC to GP-22 For respondent no.3 : Mr. K.K. Sinha, Advocate. For the intervener- respondent no.4 : M/s Md. N. Seraj and Shailesh Kumar, Advocates. ----------- 03/ 31.03.2011 I.A. No.2397 of 2011 has been filed by the applicant, namely Ashraf Khan for being added as intervener respondent in the instant case claiming that he is a sub-lessee of the petitioner for Motihari and Muzaffarpur Regional Diagnostic Centres and there are several dues which have not been paid. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this interlocutory application is allowed. Let the said applicant be added as respondent no.4 to the writ petition. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned - 2 - counsel for the State of Bihar, learned counsel for the State Health Society and learned counsel for the intervener respondent. 3. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging Memo No.23808 dated 15.02.2011 by which the Secretary of the State Health Society (respondent no.3) cancelled agreement dated 18.02.2008 by which the petitioner had been given the contract to operate and maintain Ultra Modern Diagnostic Centre in Regional Diagnostic Centres, Medical Colleges and Hospitals on gross revenue sharing basis and also for directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue providing the required services in the Regional Diagnostic Centres, Medical and Hospitals where facilities have already been established by the petitioner and to grant further time to the petitioner to establish the required facilities in the remaining Regional Diagnostic Centres, Medical Colleges and Hospitals as had been provided for in agreement dated 18.02.2008 and for other ancillary reliefs. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the agreement the petitioner had spent a huge money and had established the facilities in most of the Centres, Colleges and Hospitals, but it is the respondent who were hampering the efforts of the petitioner by illegal means merely to harass the petitioner with nefarious design. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents authorities vehemently contests the claim of the petitioner and submits that it was entirely due to the fault of the petitioner that - 3 - the terms of the agreement were not completed and hence the authority concerned had no option but to terminate the agreement by the impugned memo. It is also stated by learned counsel for the respondents that vide letter dated 21.02.2011 (Annexure-A to the counter affidavit) the petitioner has sought settlement of the dispute by way of arbitration proceeding in terms of Clause-8. 2 of the agreement in question and hence there is no occasion for this court to interfere into the matter when the arbitration proceeding is pending. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner replies that the said petition had been filed by the petitioner before the Development Commissioner, Government of Bihar as far back as on 21.02.2010, but when no step was taken by the authorities concerned, the petitioner was constrained to file this writ petition on 14.03.2011 and the matter was earlier taken up on 24.03.2011 on which date learned counsel for the respondents took adjournments. He further submits that thereafter on 26.03.2011 the respondents issued an advertisement in daily newspaper calling for walk in interviews of the applicants to provide the aforesaid facilities to others which had already been provided to the petitioner by the aforesaid agreement, which shows their ulterior motives. 7. Learned counsel for the newly added intervener respondent submits that in any view of the matter the said intervener respondent is entitled to receive the due amount from the petitioner which he is not paying on the pretext of pendency of litigation with the respondent authorities. - 4 - 8. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of this case and their respective pleadings, it is quite apparent that since the arbitration proceeding is admittedly pending before the Development Commissioner, Government of Bihar, there is neither any occasion for this court to pass any order deciding the matter nor there is any occasion for the respondents authorities to take any step in furtherance to the cancellation of the agreement, nor there is any occasion for the petitioner to pay any amount to the intervener respondent till the disposal of arbitration proceeding. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Development Commissioner, Government of Bihar to consider the arbitration matter in accordance with law after giving opportunities to all the parties, namely the petitioner (lessee), the State Health Society (lessor) and the intervener (sub-lessee) to place their case and produce materials within 60 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, as the matter is very urgent and is affecting the parties concerned seriously. 10. Till the arbitration matter is decided, advertisement dated 26.03.2011 (Annexure-20) shall remain stayed and no further step with respect to the subject matter of agreement in question shall be taken by the authorities concerned. The petitioner is directed to produce a copy of this order before the Development Commissioner, Government of Bihar within a fortnight from today. Harish (S.N.Hussain, J.)