IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12372 of 2010 M/S DAYANAND PRASAD SINHA & CO., A PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS PLACE OF BUSINESS OF JANTA PATH, KANKARBAGH, P.S.KANKARBAGH, DISTT-PATNA, THROUGH ONE O ITS PARTNERS , DAYANANAD PRASAD SINHA, S/O SHRI HARBANSHI LAL, R/O JANTA PATH, P.S.KANKARBAGH, DISTT-PATNA Versus 1.THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ROAD TRANSPORT & HIGHWAYS GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI 2.THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY-CUM-COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF ROAD CONSTRUCTION GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, VISHWESHWARAIYA BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA 3.THE ENGINEER IN-CHIEF, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, VISHWESHWARAIYA BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA 4.THE CHIEF ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGH WAYS WING, DEPARTMENT OF ROAD CONSTRUCTION GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, VISHWESHWARAIYA BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA 5. THE REGIONAL OFFICER, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT & HIGHWAYS IAS COLONY, KIDWAIPURI, PATNA 6.THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY CIRCLE VISHWESHWARAIYA BHAWAN , BAILEY ROAD, PATNA 7. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION GULZARBAGH, PATNA 8. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY PATNA WEST , DISTT-PATNA 9. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY KOCHAS AT MOHANIA, DISTT-KAIMUR 10.THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF 11.THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY BIHARSHARIF DIVISION-II, NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF ----------- For the Petitioner : M/s S. D. Sanjay & Gautam Kejriwal, Advocates For the State : Mr. P. K. Verma, A.A.G. V & Mr. P. K. Sharan, A.C. to A.A.G. V ------ 05/ 28.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State of Bihar and its authorities. No one appears for the Union of India. 2 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the decision dated 30.06.2010 taken by a Committee of the respondents interpreting Clause 47(1)(a), read with Clause 13.4 of the Standard Bidding Document of Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi for Civil Works consisting of inter-alia, the condition of contract relating to Civil Works at National Highways etc. as well as for other ancillary reliefs. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said clauses have been arbitrarily misinterpreted merely to deny the price adjustment/price escalation . It is also stated that when the authorities themselves found that there were some discrepancies in the estimate, it necessitated revised cost estimate. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents raises a preliminary objection that since the dispute arises out of contract, it can well be decided by arbitration. 5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of disputes, which have been argued in the case, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the Bihar Public Works Contract Dispute Arbitration Tribunal raising his grievances under section 11 of the Bihar Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act’ for the sake of brevity ) . If such an application along with a copy of this order is filed by the 3 petitioner before the said Tribunal within one month from today, the Tribunal will issue notice to other side and after hearing the parties and perusing the materials produced by them, it should complete the arbitration expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of filing of such application by the petitioner. MPS/ ( S. N. Hussain, J. )