[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Jammu & Kashmir High Court
M/S Comtech Institute Of Technology vs Union Of India & Ors on 20 February, 2026
Sr. No.2
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
CJ Court
Case: Arb P No. 83/2025
Date of pronouncement: 20.02.2026
Uploaded on: .02.2026
M/S Comtech Institute of Technology ...Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)
Through: Mr. C S Gupta, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Snigdha Shekhar, Advocate.
V/s
Union of India & Ors. .... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Vishal Sharma, Sr. Advocate (DSGI) with
Mr. Sumant Sudan, Advocate for R-1.
Ms. Sagira Jaffar, Assisting counsel to
Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG for R-2 & 3.
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
ORDER
(ORAL)
01. The rationales that constrained the petitioner to file the petition, under
Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the
appointment of an Arbitrator, is an expression of interest (EOI) issued by the
Government of Jammu and Kashmir for the engagement of consultant firms
for the preparation of Housing For All Plan of Action (HFAPOA) under
Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY) Housing for All-22 through the Jammu
and Kashmir Housing Board, being the State Nodal Agency Vide No.
HB/HFA/6290-91 dated January 04, 2016. The petitioner, being the lowest
bidder, was awarded with the contract vide No. JKHB/HFA/2016/7242-44
dated January 29, 2016, for housing demand survey and preparation of
Housing for All plan of Action as regards 25 cities/Towns in J&K after the
negotiation of 1% rebate on the offered tendered rates. It is contended that the
survey was completed in 2016, which was approved by SLMSC on August 03,
2016, under the Chairmanship of the Chief Secretary of the J&K State and was
forwarded to Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Government of India as
also approved by CSMC. However, as per the schedule of payment fixed in
the EOI, the payment was milestone linked and was to be made with invoice
details as under:
Milestone Linked Payment Percentage Invoice No. and Amount
Of Total date (₹)
1. Inception report and pilot 10% CIT/003/2016-17 18,31,500.00
demand survey Dated: 23.06.2016
2. 100% complete demand survey 20% CIT/004/2016-17 36,63,000.00
and 1st draft of HFAPOA Dated: 23.06.2016
3. Final for HFAPOA for 10% CIT/005/2016-17 18,31,500.00
submitting to SLSM and CSMC Dated: 23.06.2016
incorporating suggestions after
the meeting approval of
HFAPOA by CSMC
4. Approval of HFAPOA by the 60% CIT/006/2016-17 1,09,89,000.00
CSMC Dated: 27.02.2017
Total 100%
The petitioner made numerous written requests along with the requisite
invoice for the release of the payments but the same were denied on the pretext
that the requisite amount is required to be released by the Central Government.
However, till date no amount has been released due to which the petitioner had
suffered financial distress. The petitioner was informed that the funds had been
released by the Central Government and credited into the Bank Account of
J&K Housing Board. The funds were to be released in favour of the petitioner
in terms of Clause 10.2.15 which has not been done, regardless the petitioner
had made several unsuccessful attempts to resolve the dispute amicably prior
to referring the same for arbitration, as provided under Clause 10.2.24. Despite
serving a notice for appointment of an arbitrator, no response was tendered, a
petition under Section 11(6) of the Act being Arb P No. 32/2023 connected
with CM No. 6599/2023 (M/s Comtech Institute of Technology vs. Union of
India) was filed by the petitioner. The petition was, however, dismissed as
withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner/applicant to approach this Court, if
cause of action still survived.
01. It is submitted that after withdrawal of the aforesaid petition, the
petitioner approached the Jammu and Kashmir Housing Board, submitting all
the details of the work done as also the claims. However, the Board vide order
JKHD ORDER No. 35 of 2025 dated February 19, 2025, rejected the claims of
the petitioner on the ground of failure to deliver accurate, complete and
verifiable data, resulting in unacceptable delays in implementing the scheme
within the State. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner served a notice dated April
22, 2025 for appointment of an arbitrator for resolving the dispute that arose
between the parties. However, despite notice, the respondents failed to
nominate their Arbitrator or respond. Owing to the rejection of the requests,
this petition at hand.
02. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court on dated October 10, 2025,
the respondents had caused appearance and sought time to file response.
03. Concerning the response filed on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3, it is
submitted that the grounds alleged by the petitioner are misconceived and the
matter had also been under investigation by the Anti-corruption Bureau in
verification No. Housing-G-01/2018/Housing on account of breach on the part
of the petitioner, for, the central scheme meant for public below the poverty
line had been affected and the legitimate beneficiaries have been deprived
from getting the benefit of the Scheme due to the negligence and default of the
petitioner firm. And hence denies the claim that is sought to be made by the
petitioner.
04. The existence of the arbitration clause, as aforesaid, and its invocation
by the petitioner vide notice dated April 22, 2025, is not disputed.
05. However, having argued the matter at some length, learned counsel for
the respondents, as always, fairly submit that let an arbitrator be appointed as
the respondents shall raise all possible pleas/ objections before the arbitrator in
06. Accordingly, in the wake of the position sketched out above and in
terms of the statements made by the learned counsel for the parties, the
petition is allowed. And, with consent of learned counsel for the parties,
Mr. Vinod Sharma, Chief Engineer (Retd.) R/o House No. 42, Sector 01-A
Trikuta Nagar, Jammu Mobile No.9419180988 is appointed as an
Arbitrator. Who shall proceed with the matter in accordance with the
provisions of the Act. And to make an award within the time provided in the
Act itself after charging the prescribed fee along with incidental expenses to be
shared by the parties. The respondents are at liberty to raise all the objections
as regards the subject matter before the learned Arbitrator.
07. Registry to send a copy of this order to the learned arbitrator.
08. Disposed of.
(ARUN PALLI)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Jammu
20.02.2026
Sunita
