Writ jurisdiction in works contract disputes is unavailable where the issue turns on contractual interpretation and alternative remedies exist.

A dispute under a non-statutory works contract involving tax-inclusive rates, deduction at source, and adjustment for changes in tax liability was held to be a matter of contractual interpretation, not writ adjudication. The Supreme Court reasoned that questions on whether any amount was due, whether retention of money was justified, and how tax-deduction changes affected the contractual balance had to be resolved under the contract. Because an arbitration clause and civil remedies were available, recourse to Article 226 was inappropriate and could not replace ordinary contractual remedies. The proper forum was arbitration or civil court, as available in law.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition under Article 226 was maintainable to challenge deduction or retention of amounts arising out of a works contract and linked tax-composition arrangements, and whether the dispute had to be pursued under the contract or before the civil court or arbitrator.

Analysis: The dispute turned on interpretation of contractual clauses governing tax-inclusive rates, deduction at source, and adjustment for changes in tax liability. The Court held that the contract was in the realm of private law and not a statutory contract. Questions as to whether any amount was due under the contract, whether the Government was justified in retaining money, and whether a reduction in tax or deduction rate under the statutory arrangements affected the contractual balance were matters of contractual interpretation. Such questions could not be adjudicated in a writ petition. The existence of an arbitration clause and the availability of a civil remedy also made recourse to Article 226 inappropriate, since the writ jurisdiction is not meant to supplant ordinary contractual remedies.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and the respondent had to pursue the contractual remedy before the arbitrator or the civil court, as available in law.

Ratio Decidendi: A dispute arising from a non-statutory works contract, even if it involves questions touching tax-composition or deduction provisions, is not amenable to writ jurisdiction where the controversy is essentially contractual and an effective alternative remedy exists.

---