[2026:RJ-JP:28557-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1475/2026 CNR: RJHC020265482026 | URN: CMA / 2818U / 2026 Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project (Ruidp), Project Implementation Unit, 1-Kaustabh, Ganvari Road, Civil Lines, Nayapura, Kota- 324001 Rajasthan, Represented Through Its Authorised Signatory. ----Appellant Versus Engineering Project (India) Limited (Epi), Through Additional General Manager, Northern Office, Core 3, Scope Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prakash Chandra Jain Mr. Roshan Vishwakarma Mr. Shaitan Choudhary Adv. Vinny Jain For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order(Oral) 24/07/2026 Per: Arun Monga, J 1. The present appeal has been filed aggrieved by the order dated 23.01.2026 passed by the learned Commercial Court No. 4, Jaipur Metro II, whereby the appellant’s application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act of 1996”) was dismissed. 2. The dispute arises out of a works contract executed between the Appellant, Rajasthan Urban Infrastructure Development Project (RUIDP), and the Respondent, Engineering Projects (India) [2026:RJ-JP:28557-DB] (2 of 3) [CMA-1475/2026] Limited (EPIL). The contract contained detailed stipulations governing the time schedule for execution, the procedure for grant of extensions, levy of liquidated damages, and submission of claims supported by contemporaneous records, while treating time as the essence of the contract. 2.1 During the execution of the works, delays occurred, giving rise to disputes regarding the party responsible for the delay, the validity of the levy of liquidated damages, release of withheld amounts, admissibility of additional claims, and entitlement to interest under the contract. The disputes were referred to arbitration for adjudication. 2.2 By an award dated 17.09.2016, the Arbitral Tribunal allowed several claims of the Respondent, set aside the levy of liquidated damages, granted payments beyond the contractual stipulations, and awarded interest. Thereafter, on an application under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Tribunal passed a Modified Award dated 01.11.2016, enhancing the Appellant's liability by approximately ₹1 crore. 2.3 Aggrieved thereby, the challenge laid by the Appellant under Section 34 of the Act of 1996 was dismissed by the Commercial Court No. 4, Jaipur Metro II vide order dated 23.01.2026. 2.4 Hence, the instant appeal. 3. In the aforesaid backdrop, we have heard learned counsel for the appellant. 4. First and foremost, reference may be made to Circular/ Office Memorandum F. No. 4(1)/2013-DPE(GM)/FTS-1835 dated 22.05.2018, issued by the Ministry of Heavy Industries & Public Enterprises, the relevant clauses of which read as under: [2026:RJ-JP:28557-DB] (3 of 3) [CMA-1475/2026] “4. As per the approved new mechanism to resolve the commercial disputes, the following structure and procedure shall be followed by the concerned disputing parties: A. Structure: i. At the First level (tier), such commercial disputes shall be referred to a Committee comprising of Secretaries of the Administrative Ministries/Departments to which the disputing CPSEs/Parties belong and Secretary-D/o Legal Affairs. The Financial Advisors (FAs) of the two concerned Administrative Ministries/Departments will represent the issues related to the dispute in question before the above Committee. In case the two disputing parties belong to the same Ministry/Department, the above said Committee will comprise Secretary of the administrative Ministry/Department concerned, Secretary-D/o Legal Affairs and Secretary- Department of Public Enterprises. In such a case, the matter may be represented before the Committee by the FA and one Joint Secretary of that Ministry/Department. Further, in case of a dispute between CPSE and State Government Department/Organization, the above said Committee will comprise the Secretary of the Ministry/Department of the Union to which the CPSE belongs and Secretary-D/o Legal Affairs and a senior officer nominated by the Chief Secretary of the State concerned. In such a case, the matter will be represented before the Committee by the FA of the concerned administrative Ministry/Department and the concerned Principal Secretary of the State Government Department/ Organisation. ii. In case the dispute remains unresolved even after consideration by the above Committee, the same will be referred at the Second level (tier) to the Cabinet Secretary, whose decision will be final and binding on all concerned.” 5. In light of the aforesaid circular, on a court query, learned counsel for the appellant submits, upon instructions, that appellant shall approach the Secretary of the Ministry of Heavy Industries & Public Enterprises, with a request to constitute a committee for resolution of dispute in accordance with the mechanism and procedure prescribed in the circular, ibid. 6. Upon the appellant approaching the Secretary within 30 days from the date of this order, the respondent shall refrain from taking any coercive steps against the appellant so as to await the decision of the Committee in terms of the aforesaid circular. 7. The present appeal is disposed of in the above terms. 8. Any pending applications stand disposed of. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (ARUN MONGA),J 3/Tushar/Prateek