- (1.) Leave granted. These appeals arise out of an order dated 09.10.2014 passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in Writ Petition No. 7 of 2014 filed in public interest. The writ petition prayed for a direction to the Respondent-Union of India and the State of Chhattisgarh to undertake proper repair and maintenance of a 26 kms. long road connecting Raipur and Durg in the State of Chhattisgarh. A further direction restraining the Concessionaire-M/s. DSC Viacon Private Limited not to collect any toll fee from the users of the road till the overlaying and maintenance thereof was completed in accordance with the concessionaire agreement and the guidelines on the subject, was also prayed for.
(2.) The Petitioner's case in the writ petition was that the construction and upkeep of the road in question was allotted to the Concessionaire on the Build Operate and Transfer (BOT) basis and even when the road was in very poor shape, the Concessionaire was recovering user charges/toll from the public without discharging its obligations under the agreement. Complaints to different administrative authorities including the Superintendent of Traffic Police had, according to the writ-Petitioner, fallen on deaf ears and led to no action or improvement in the situation. The writ Petitioner alleged a complete breakdown of official machinery allowing the illegality to continue unabated due mainly to the alleged inaction on the part of the State Government and the failure of its officers to enforce duties enjoined upon the Concessionaire under the agreement. It was further alleged that a Committee appointed for the purpose had also found several deficiencies and discrepancies in the upkeep of the road but all those deficiencies continued to persist while the Concessionaire was recovering crores of rupees from the public without so much as maintaining the road in proper shape and condition.
(3.) By an order dated 09.10.2014, a Division Bench of the High Court after notice to the Respondent in the writ petition passed an order requiring the Concessionaire to file an undertaking within two weeks to the effect that it will ensure proper repair of the road to the satisfaction of Respondents No. 1 to 3. It was further directed that if the undertaking was not filed, the amount of toll collected by the Concessionaire shall be deposited with the Respondent-UOI. When the matter came up once again before the High Court on 26.11.2014, the Concessionaire appears to have argued that the disputes sought to be raised by the writ-Petitioner were contractual in nature which could be effectively adjudicated upon only in arbitration proceedings that had been started by the Concessionaire before the Arbitrator. It was also contended that the Arbitrator had in the said proceedings issued a stay order against the proposed termination of the contract on account of the alleged failure of the Concessionaire to keep the road in good condition. It was argued that in case the Concessionaire failed to repair the road, the Government of India could carry out the repairs at the cost of the Concessionaire. It was urged that the Concessionaire was making its best efforts to keep the road in good condition in terms of the agreement executed between Respondents No. 1 to 3 and the Concessionaire.;