Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010106242025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2694/2025 ECI SANJOSE (JV) A JOINT VENTURE BETWEEN ECI ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD, BEING A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT PLOT NO. A12-13, PANCHAVATI TOWNSHIP, MANIKONDA, RAJENDRANAGAR MANDAL, RR DISTRICT, HYDERABAD- 500089, ANDRA PRADESH AND M/S CONSTRUCTORA SANJOSE, S.A, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE ROSALIA DE CASTRO,44, PONTEVENDRA, SPAIN AND ITS INDIAN OFFICE AT UNIT 602, GLOBAL FOYER BUILDING, GOLF COURSE ROAD, SECTOR-43, GURGAON-122002, HARYANA VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, RAILWAY BOARD, GOVT. OF INDIA. RAIL BHAWAN, RAFI MARG, NEW DELHI-110001. 2:NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER MALIGAON GUWAHATI ASSAM 3:THE GENERAL MANAGER (CONSTRUCTION) NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI ASSAM 4:THE CHIEF ENGINEER(CONSTRUCTION) NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY Page No.# 2/4 GUWAHATI ASSAM. 5:THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTION) NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY IMPHA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G KHANDELIA, MR R PAUL,MR. K DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER 20.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. P.J. Saikia, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner assisted by Mr. G. Khandelia, learned counsel. Also heard Mr. H. Gupta, learned CGC for all the respondents. 2. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the impugned notice dated 08.05.2025 issued by the respondent no.5, which had threatened to terminate the petitioner’s contract under Clause 62 of the General Conditions of Contract (GCC) if the contract work did not commence, should be set aside, inasmuch as, the respondents have not taken any decision on the petitioner’s reply dated 09.05.2025, to the 7 (seven) days’ notice issued vide letter dated 08.05.2025. 3. The petitioner’s counsel submits that though the contract work had stopped in the year 2022, a new Work Action Plan had been submitted by the petitioner on 07.05.2025 and a Close Traversing Survey Report had been Page No.# 3/4 submitted on 12.05.2025. Further, in terms of the reply dated 09.05.2025, the petitioner had planned to recommence the contract work in the last week of May, 2025. 4. Mr. H. Gupta, learned CGC has submitted 2 letters, both dated 19.05.2025, issued by the respondents, giving 48 hours notice to the petitioner to commence the contract work, failing which the contract would be terminated in terms of Clause 62 of the GCC. 5. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner has not been given a copy of the two letters dated 19.05.2025 till date. He however submits that the writ petition can be disposed of, if a direction is issued to the respondents to take a decision on the petitioner’s reply dated 19.05.2025 submitted in response to the 7 days notice dated 08.05.2025. 6. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 7. On perusing the 48 hours notice dated 19.05.2025 and the other letter dated 19.05.2025, issued by the State respondents, wherein the respondents are threatening to rescind the contract under Clause 62 of the GCC, this Court finds that both the said letters dated 19.05.2025 have not made any reference to the petitioner’s reply dated 09.05.2025. 8. Though the counsel for the respondents has submitted that the petitioner’s Close Traversing Survey Report had been made in relation to a wrong alignment Page No.# 4/4 pertaining to Tunnel T-25, this Court is of the view that unless the reply dated 09.05.2025 is decided and communicated to the petitioner, the 7 (seven) days’ notice dated 08.05.2025 and the 48 hours notice dated 19.05.2025, which has been submitted to the Court today, should not be acted upon. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to take a decision on the petitioner’s reply dated 09.05.2025 and the Close Traversing Survey Report dated 12.05.2025. Till a decision is taken and communicated to the petitioner, the 7 (seven) days’ notice dated 08.05.2025 and the 48 hours notice dated 19.05.2025 which has been submitted today, shall not be acted upon. 9. The 2 letters, both dated 19.05.2025 are also made a part of the record and marked as Annexure-X (Collectively). A copy of the Annexure-X (Collectively) has also been furnished to the counsel for the petitioner. 10. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant