Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010246692025 2025:GAU-AS:15256 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6320/2025 M/S MVVS-PKR JV A JOINT VENTURE, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT RAMENDRA KUTHI COLONEL CHOUWMUHANI, AGARTALA, TRIPURA, PIN- 799001, REPRESENTED BY SRI RAJ KUMAR BISWAS, SON OF LATE RAMENDRA NATH BISWAS, R/O HOUSE NO 73, FLAT A103, NIRMAL NIWAS APARTMENT, PRAGATI NAGAR PATH, LALGANESH, GUWAHATI-781034, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS. REPRESENTED THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, RAIL BHAWAN , NEW DELHI- 110001 2:NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAY THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER N F RAILWAYS MALIGAON GUWAHATI- 781011 3:THE ADRM N F RAILWAYS GUWAHATI N F RAILWAYS MALIGAON GUWAHATI- 781011 4:THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER N F RAILWAYS MALIGAON GUWAHATI- 781011 Page No.# 2/5 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Advocates for the petitioner(s) : Mr. B Pathak Advocates for the respondent(s) : Mr. H Gupta, CGC Date on which Judgment is reserved : NA Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 12.11.2025 Whether the Pronouncement is of the : NA Operative Part of the Judgment Whether the Full Judgment has been : Yes Pronounced JUDGMENT & ORDER(ORAL) Heard Mr. B Pathak, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. H Gupta, the learned CGC, who appears on behalf of the NF Railway. 2. The dispute in the instant proceedings pertains to non-referring of the same to the Dispute Adjudication Board (for short, ‘the DAB’) as is set out in Clause 63.2 of the Standard General Conditions of Contract (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the SGCC’) which is a Part II of the General Conditions of the Contract, April 2022, (for short, ‘the GCC’), Page No.# 3/5 3. From the materials on record, it is seen that pursuant to a Notice Inviting Tender, a Letter of Acceptance was issued on 25.11.2024 for construction of passenger amenities building, one number distributed E.I Cabin, three numbers E.I LOC Huts, Sr.CDO Office Complex (80mx8m), new parcel office (100x8) sqm and provision of 46 bay shed for passenger, parcel platform and extension of existing platforms along with provision of new platform and other ancillary works at Guwahati Railway Station in connection with GHY Yard remodeling work. 4. 4. On 21.07.2025, a seven day’s notice was issued in terms with Clause 62 of the GCC stipulating therein that if there is a failure to commence the work/to make good progress, the contract would be terminated and the balance work would be completed without the participation of the petitioner. The petitioner replied to the same. It is very important to take note of that on 29.07.2025, after the issuance of the notice dated 21.07.2025, the contract agreement was entered into by and between the petitioner and the Railways. In that regard, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had produced the contract agreement, which is kept on record and marked with the letter ‘X’. 5. It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant thereto on 18.09.2025, another notice was issued by the ADRM, Guwahati NF Railway which is a 48 hours notice in terms with Section 62 of the Page No.# 4/5 SGCC. The petitioner replied to the said notice on 19.09.2025 and again sought for referral of such dispute to the DAB. 6. It is at this stage relevant to take note of Clause 63.2 of the Part II of the SGCC which stipulates the Dispute Adjudication Board in terms with Clause 63.2.1, any dispute if not settled with the Engineer shall be referred to the DAB. 7. It has been submitted that the dispute in the instant case is a dispute between the petitioner and not settled by the Engineer as defined in Clause 1(1)(e) of Part II of the SGCC. It is also mandated in Clause 63.2.1 that the DAB would be formed within a period of 90 days of signing of the contract agreement. 8. This Court has enquired with Mr. H Gupta, the learned CGC as to whether the DAB has been constituted. It has been submitted upon instruction that the DAB is in the process of being constituted. 9. Taking into account that the dispute in question falls within the ambit of a dispute which can be adjudicated by the DAB, this Court, therefore, disposes of the instant writ petition with a direction upon the concerned respondent authorities to constitute the Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB) forthwith taking into account that the 90 days period had already elapsed on 30.10.2025 and thereupon the dispute be referred to the DAB for their decision in terms with the SGCC. Page No.# 5/5 10. Page No.# 5/5 10. With the above, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. 11. Before parting with the records, this Court further finds it pertinent to observe that Clause 63.2.12 further mandates that the obligation of the Railway as well as the Contactor shall not be altered by reasons of issue being or under reference to the DAB. Under such circumstances, the obligation of the petitioner as well as the Railway in terms with the contract shall continue irrespective of such reference being made to the DAB. JUDGE Comparing Assistant