THE BRAITHWAITE BURN AND JESSOP CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED SANJUKTA DUTTA vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. — WPA /3307/2026
Case under No Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 07th April 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA0065172026
Next Hearing
11th February 2026
Filing Number
WPA /3193/2026
Filing Date
10-02-2026
Registration No
WPA /3307/2026
Registration Date
10-02-2026
Judge
HON'BLE JUSTICE KRISHNA RAO
Coram
HON'BLE JUSTICE KRISHNA RAO
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )
Sub-Category
Residuary ( 26 )
Judicial Branch
MANDAMUS SECTION
Decision Date
07th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE BRAITHWAITE BURN AND JESSOP CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED SANJUKTA DUTTA
Respondent(s)
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE KRISHNA RAO
NEW MOTION
URGENT MOTION 1
TO BE MENTIONED
URGENT MOTION 1
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 11-02-2026 | NEW MOTION | |
| 27-03-2026 | URGENT MOTION 1 | |
| 25-03-2026 | TO BE MENTIONED | |
| 12-02-2026 | URGENT MOTION 1 |
Orders
Summary The High Court at Calcutta disposed of a writ petition challenging the Union of India's 48-hour notice to Braithwaite Burn and Jessop Construction Company to commence work on a railway project or face contract termination. Finding disputed factual questions between the parties regarding work progress and site impediments (environmental clearances, utility relocations, encroachments), the court declined to adjudicate the contractual dispute in writ jurisdiction. Instead, it directed the parties to first attempt resolution through the Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB) under the contract's Clause 63.2, and if unsuccessful, proceed to arbitration as contractually mandated. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The High Court at Calcutta disposed of a writ petition challenging the Union of India's 48-hour notice to Braithwaite Burn and Jessop Construction Company to commence work on a railway project or face contract termination. Finding disputed factual questions between the parties regarding work progress and site impediments (environmental clearances, utility relocations, encroachments), the court declined to adjudicate the contractual dispute in writ jurisdiction. Instead, it directed the parties to first attempt resolution through the Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB) under the contract's Clause 63.2, and if unsuccessful, proceed to arbitration as contractually mandated. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts