Allahabad High Court
M/S RAM KRIPAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the matter is a purely contractual dispute and not within the jurisdiction of Article 226, and therefore dismissed the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner, M/s Ram Kripal Singh, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the State of U.P. to pay an admitted amount for work completed in 2013, with interest, after the demand was raised only in 2023. The State contended that the claim arose ten years after completion and that the contract contained an arbitration clause. The Court held that the dispute is purely contractual and falls outside the jurisdiction of Article 226. Citing a prior decision (Writ Petition No.11544 of 2014), the Court observed that issues of contract performance, rates, and payment are to be decided by the competent authority or through arbitration. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to file a civil suit or invoke arbitration as per the agreement.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable for a contractual dispute concerning payment under a contract containing an arbitration clause
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a mandamus directing payment of the withheld amount
- What is the appropriate remedy for the petitioner – a civil suit or arbitration
Subjects
- Article 226
- mandamus
- contractual dispute
- arbitration clause
- non‑payment
- civil suit
- jurisdiction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 26262 of 2023
M/S Ram Kripal Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Chandra Shekhar Agnihotri
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.
1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with the
following prayer:-
"i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding/ directing the respondents to make payment of the admitted
withheld amount to the petitioner of work being done by him, which is
duly admitted by the department copy of which is annexed as Annexure
No.5 and 6 to this writ petition, within the stipulated time along with the
interest @ 18% per annum from the date of completion of work."
2. In the counter affidavit filed by the State it is stated that though the
petitioner has completed the work in the year 2013 but the demand was
raised by him for the first time in the department vide letter dated
02.02.2023 i.e. after about 10 years. It is further admitted between the
counsel for the parties that in the agreement executed between the parties,
there is an arbitration clause.
3. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that controversy
involved in the present writ petition did not resolved under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India.
4. In a similar matter, this Court in its judgment and order dated
24.02.2024 passed in Writ Petition No.11544 of 2014 (M/s R.S.
Associates through Proprietor geeta Singh vs. State of U.P. and
others has observed that:-
WRIC No. 26262 of 2023
2
"These are purely contractual matters and we are not inclined to
entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in this regard.
Whether the work under the contract has been satisfactorily carried out;
whether the rates quoted are in accordance with the terms of the
agreement and the applicable schedule of rates; whether the work has
been carried out properly are issues which have to be addressed, among
other questions, by the competent authority before an appropriate
decision is taken. The jurisdiction of the Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution cannot appropriately be exercised in such matters. The
remedy of the contractor, if he is aggrieved by non payment, would be to
either file an ordinary civil suit or if there is an arbitration agreement
between the parties, to invoke the terms of the agreement."
5. In view of aforesaid, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to either
file an ordinary civil suit or if there is an arbitration agreement between the
parties, to invoke the terms of the agreement.
(Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.)
September 17, 2026
Swati
Digitally signed by :-
SWATI PATHAK
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…