CLASSIC NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITEDversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     C/SCA/17428/2022                              JUDGMENT DATED: 07/05/2026




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

          R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17428 of 2022


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
==========================================
        Approved for Reporting            Yes        No
                                                      ✔
==========================================
              CLASSIC NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED
                              Versus
                    STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================
Appearance:
MR.CHIRAG K SUKHWANI(6603) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR ANGESH PANCHAL AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK

                            Date : 07/05/2026

                             ORAL JUDGMENT

1.       RULE. Learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of
notice of rule on behalf of respondent – authorities.

2.       With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the
respective parties, the matter is taken up for hearing and disposal.

3.       Present petition is filed by the petitioner under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India and under the provisions of the
Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 1992
[hereinafter be referred to as “the Act”] seeking the following
reliefs:-


                                  Page 1 of 5
     C/SCA/17428/2022                                     JUDGMENT DATED: 07/05/2026




          “a.    Your Lordships be pleased to admit present petition.

          b.     Your Lordships may be pleased to issue appropriate
                 writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order
                 or direction by quashing and setting aside common
                 judgment and order dated 21.07.2022 passed by
                 Hon’ble Gujarat Public Works Contract Disputes
                 Arbitration Tribunal in Civil Application No. 3 of 2020
                 in Arbitration Reference No.2 of 2020.

          c.     Your Lordships may be pleased to by way of interim
                 relief stay common judgment and order dated
                 21.07.2022 passed by Hon’ble Gujarat Public Works
                 Contract Disputes Arbitration Tribunal in Civil
                 Application No. 3 of 2020 in Arbitration Reference
                 No.2 of 2020 and restrain respondents from effecting
                 recovery of Rs.88,66,371/- from petitioner’s other
                 contracts dues and deposits.

          d.     Such other and further reliefs as may be deemed fit in
                 view of facts and circumstances of the case be
                 granted.”


4.       Brief facts of the present case are, in nutshell, as under:-

4.1      That the Petitioner is a Company incorporated under the
Companies Act, 1956            and it is registered Government Approved
Contractor having Registration as Class "AA" Contractor and the
petitioner is carrying the business at the address shown in the cause
title. The petitioner was awarded the contract for Strengthening to
Km. 72/4 to 85/8 National Highway 8A from Bagodra to Limbdi by
agreement No.B-2/9/2007-08 and the estimated cost of the work was
Rs.9,04,72,806.60          and    the      petitioner's     tender       cost      was
Rs.7,50,49,031.50 i.e. 17.05% below the estimated cost.

4.2      That the tender of the petitioner was accepted and the
respondent – authorities issued Tender Acceptance Letter No.Tender /
1937 of 2007-08 on 07.07.2007. Thereafter, the work order                         was

                                      Page 2 of 5
   C/SCA/17428/2022                                    JUDGMENT DATED: 07/05/2026




issued on 31.07.2007 with stipulated period of 9 months and, thus,
the work was required to be completed on or before 30.04.2008 and
accordingly the work was completed on 24.08.2008 in all respects as
per tender conditions.

4.3    That the petitioner addressed a letter dated 11.08.2008 to the
Deputy Executive Engineer to release the FDR of Rs.22,61,820/- as
well as Bank Guarantee of Rs.45,23,640/- and the Final Bill was paid
on 04.09.2008. The Deputy Executive Engineer on 05.09.2008 made a
proposal in the prescribed form for refund of FDR and Bank
Guarantee. Since the work was completed, respondent No.2 released
the FDR of Rs.22,62,000/-.

4.4    That     the   Deputy    Executive        Engineer   by    letters    dated
23.02.2010,       13.04.2010,    07.06.2010,        06.07.2010,      25.08.2010,
07.09.2010 and 13.09.2010 directed the petitioner to carry out the
repairs to the patch work occurred during monsoon. The repairing
work was carried out, however, due to continuous rain, again the
patches were developed to which repairing work was done and
completed and reported to the Deputy Executive Engineer by letter
dated 25.09.2010.

4.5    That respondent No.2 by letter dated 11.01.2014 served the
notice for depositing Rs.88,66,371/- towards repairing within 7 days,
failing which amount will be recovered either from the deposits of
other contracts or from bills of present contract or from other deposits
lying with the other Divisions. The respondent No.2 once again by
letter dated 24.03.2015 directed the petitioner to deposit immediately
Rs.88,66,371/-, failing which proceedings as per standardized code
will be initiated.



                                   Page 3 of 5
     C/SCA/17428/2022                             JUDGMENT DATED: 07/05/2026




4.6      That Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration
Tribunal [hereinafter be referred to as “the Tribunal”] did not have
provision for granting the interim relief, thus there was no other
alternate efÏcacious remedy available except the filing of the petition,
accordingly Special Civil Application No.6811 of 2015 was filed, which
was withdrawn with liberty to file fresh petition.

4.7      That the petitioner had filed Special Civil Application No.18309
of 2015 before this Court which came to be allowed vide order dated
18.02.2016. Being aggrieved, the respondents filed LPA(Civil)
No.36096 of 2016 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India which
was allowed by order dated 08.01.2020 on jurisdiction and the
petitioner was permitted to file proceedings before the Tribunal,
accordingly Arbitration No.2 of 2020 with Civil Application No.3 of
2020 is filed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by common order dated
21.07.2022 dismissed Civil Application No.3 of 2020.

5.       Being aggrieved by the said order of the Tribunal, the petitioner
has preferred this petition.

6.       Heard Mr.K. G. Sukhwani, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.Angesh Panchal, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the
respondent – authorities at length.

7.       Mr.Sukhwani, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
the same facts which are narrated in the memo of petition and also
submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in deciding three
applications by common judgment and even no any such application
was filed for consolidating all three applications. He has submitted
that the Tribunal has committed an error of facts and law in not
considering the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court for


                                  Page 4 of 5
       C/SCA/17428/2022                                                                JUDGMENT DATED: 07/05/2026




 deciding the dispute on merits and even committed an error in not
 considering the provisions of Section 28(1) of the Arbitration and
 Conciliation Act which provides for deciding / adjudicating the dispute
 in accordance with the substantive law for the time being in force. In
 support of his submissions, Mr.Sukhwani, learned counsel has relied
 upon the various decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and has
 submitted that the petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned
 order deserves to be quashed and set aside.

 8.         Per contra, Mr.Panchal, learned Assistant Government Pleader,
 upon instruction from the concerned department, has submitted that
 though the matter is decided by the Arbitration Tribunal, let
 appropriate direction be issued to Arbitration Tribunal to decide the
 matter as expeditiously as possible.

 9.         This Court has considered the averments made in the petition
 and the submissions made on behalf of both the parties and perused
 the impugned order passed by the Tribunal.

 10.        For the foregoing reasons, the petition is allowed in part. The
 Arbitration Tribunal is hereby directed to decide the matter in
 accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a
 period of six months from the date of the receipt of the writ of this
 order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Till then,
 no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. Direct service
 is permitted. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.


                                                                      (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
 V.R. PANCHAL

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: VIJAYKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PANCHAL(HC00171), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 08/05/2026 15:15:10




                                                          Page 5 of 5