Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48737-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7984 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dharmendra Kumar Lodhi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Fisheries Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Kumar Pandey,Neelanjali Gupta,Utkarsh Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suresh Chandra Verma Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Suresh Chandra Verma, learned Counsel appearing for respondent nos.2 and 3. 2. This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers :- "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 09.05.2025 and 03.06.2025 passed by the opposite party no.3 as contained in Annexure No.1 and 5 to this writ petition ; (ii). issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to allow the petitioner to perform the fishing work in terms of the tender agreement dated 29.01.2020." 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that tender was floated by the U.P. Fisheries Development Corporation Ltd., for grant of fishing contract in respect of the Chandrawal Reservoir situated in District Mahoba. The petitioner was declared successful bidder with highest bid of Rs.51 lacs. A contract was signed between the parties for a period of 26.02.2020 to 30.06.2020 i.e. for four months. Thereafter, another contract was signed between the parties extending the period up to 30.06.2025 and thereafter again another agreement was signed extending the period up to 30.06.2030. 4. The respondent No.2 has now passed an order in an arbitrary manner on 24.09.2024 alleging that an amount of Rs.66,76,790/- outstanding to be paid by the petitioner and in case the petitioner does not pay the same, the contract shall stands cancelled. 5. The petitioner preferred a writ petition before this court at Allahabad bearing Writ (C) No.37393 of 2024 challenging the order dated 24.09.2024 and the respondent no.3 in pursuance of such filing of writ petition, cancelled his earlier order dated 24.09.2024 by an order dated 18.11.2024. Now the petitioner has been informed on 19.11.2024 that the petitioner should deposit an amount of Rs.56,00,182/-. 6. On 20.02.2025, respondent no.3 has passed order stopping the petitioner from fishing at Chandrawal Reservoir with immediate effect. The petitioner has deposited certain amount with respondent no.3 and he is now required to deposit Rs.44,80,047/- including interest up to 31.03.2025. 7. When Writ Petition (C) No.37393 of 2024 was listed before this court at Allahabad, a statement was given by the respondents that the order dated 24.09.2024 has been recalled. The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. 8. The petitioner has now received two letters on 28.03.2025 and 26.04.2025 asking the petitioner to deposit Rs.64,53,647/- latest by 28.04.2025 and in case of failure, he should stop fishing in the reservoir. The petitioner could not deposit the amount as directed and the contract has been cancelled by the impugned orders dated 09.05.2025 and 03.06.2025. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. 9. Learned counsel for the respondents has pointed out Condition No.26 of the Contract signed between the parties. Copy of which has been filed as Annexure to the petition which indicates that the matter would be referred to the Arbitrator in case there is an issue arising relating to the contract. 10. Shri S.C. Verma, has pointed out that the respondents has passed another order on 13.08.2025, which has also been served on the petitioner. A copy of which has been produced before this Court, is taken on record. This order/letter has been issued in response to the notary affidavit submitted by the petitioner on 01.07.2025 wherein he has stated that he is unable to continue with the contract. The order dated 13.08.2025 also mentions that the petitioner has violated the terms and conditions namely Condition No.2 of the notice inviting tender and also Condition Nos.9, 10 and 11 and therefore, the Bank guarantee/surety deposited by the petitioner has been forfeited. The amount that is due to the respondent nos.2 and 3 shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue and the Firm in question is proposed to be blacklisted in terms of the Condition No.15 of the Contract signed by the petitioner. 11. It has been submitted that the writ petition challenging cancellation of contract is not maintainable as sufficient opportunity was given to the petitioner to deposit the remaining dues arising out of the contract and conditions of contract not being respected by the petitioner, the contract has been cancelled. In case, the petitioner has any grievance, he should approach the respondent no.2 for appointment of Arbitrator. 12. We find that the writ petition prays for relief which cannot be granted in view of the contract being signed by the petitioner with the respondents. It is dismissed. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Pks Digitally signed by :- POOJA SETH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench