Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 498 (GUJ)

Prabhudas Kalidas v. State of Gujarat

2018-02-14

A.J.SHASTRI

body2018
ORDER : A.J. Shastri, J. 1. RULE. Learned AGP Mr. Utkarsh Sharma waives service of rule on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing. Heard learned advocate Mr. N.L. Ramnani for Ms. Bhavnani, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and learned AGP Mr. Utkarsh Sharma appearing for the respondent. 2. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have challenged the orders, dated 14.06.2011 passed by Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Arbitration Reference No. 250 of 1996, whereby relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of V.A. Tech. Escher Wyas Flovel Limited v. Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board & Anr., reported in (2011) 13 SCC 261, disposed of the Reference before it by holding that it is covered by the said judgment and that the Arbitration Reference was not maintainable before the Tribunal. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the Tribunal relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of V.A. Tech. Escher Wyas Flovel Limited (supra) has disposed of the Reference as not maintainable. The learned Assistant Government Pleader, relying upon the judgment in the case of Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority & Anr. v. L.G. Chaudhary Engineers and Contractors, reported in (2012) 3 SCC 495 , submitted that the judgment in the case of V.A. Tech. Escher Wyas Flovel Limited (supra) is held to be per incuriam and it is further held that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain the Reference. The learned Assistant Government Pleader has also further relied upon the judgment and order dated 26.6.2014 passed in Special Civil Application No. 12632 of 2012 and allied matters, judgment and order dated 23.4.2015 passed in Special Civil Application No. 1086 of 2015 as well as the judgment and order dated 19.8.2015 passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 15730 of 2012 and has contended that the petition deserves to be allowed as prayed for and the proceedings of Arbitration Reference No. 42 of 2000 deserve to be restored back to the file of the Tribunal. 4. Considering the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority & Anr. (supra), the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of V.A. Tech. 4. Considering the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority & Anr. (supra), the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of V.A. Tech. Escher Wyas Flovel Limited (supra) in cases where the work contract is over/completed, has become 'per incuriam' and therefore, the Arbitration Tribunal was not justified in law in rejecting the Reference. 5. Resultantly, the order, dated 14.06.2011 passed by Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Arbitration Reference No. 250 of 1996 is quashed and set aside. The Reference in question is restored back to the Tribunal. The Tribunal shall proceed with the Reference and decide the same in accordance with law after hearing all the parties. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute. There shall be no order as to costs.