BHULLAR CONSTRUCTION CO. Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Civil Revision and has been directed against the order dated 10.8.2000 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Patiala who rejected the prayer of the petitioner for the removal of Shri Ashok Sood, the Arbitrator, who was nominated by the Chief Engineer S. Sarabjit Singh, for the reasons given in para No. 9 of the impugned order, which is reproduced as under :-

(2.) SOME facts can be noticed in the following manner. Shri Sarabjit Singh, when he was serving as Superintending Engineer was nominated as an Arbitrator by the Chief Engineer in terms of Clause 67 of the agreement which lays down that the appointment of the Arbitrator shall be from amongst the officers of the rank of the serving Superintending Engineers of the Department. The petitioner filed an application under Section 14 of the Arbitration and Reconciliation Act, 1996 for the removal of the Arbitrator Shri Sarabjit Singh on the plea that he has not taken sufficient steps in the proceedings. Shri Sarabjit Singh filed reply annexure P-3 and he stated that he was very busy and hence was not in a position to perform the duty of Arbitrator in the said matter. In the meanwhile Shri Sarabjit Singh the sole Arbitrator was promoted as Chief Engineer. In the capacity of a Chief Engineer he nominated Shri Ashok Sood, as Arbitrator in his place in terms of Clause 67 of the agreement. The petitioner made a prayer that this appointment of Shri Ashok Soods, as an Arbitrator, by Sarabjit Singh, is illegal and against the provisions of law. This prayer did not find favour with the Court. Hence the present revision.

(3.) THE grouse of the learned counsel for the petitioner is two fold; firstly, that Shri Sarabjit Singh could not nominate Shri Ashok Sood and secondly when the petition under Section 14 of the Arbitration and Reconciliation Act, 1996, is pending before the Civil Court, any action on the part of the Chief Engineer for the appointment of Arbitrator is illegal.