NAIM AKHTAR Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MANDI DIVISION-II

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant application filed under Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, as amended upto date, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for termination of the mandate of arbitrator and for appointment of substitute arbitrator.

(2.) For having a bird's eye view, facts as emerge from the record are that the petitioner was awarded work of construction of Ghatta-Sihan Road Km. 0/0 to 1/900 (ii) C/o Chunahan Malhnoo Road Km. 0/0 to 4/500 under PMGSY for the year 2003-04 Package No. HP-08-08, Agreement No. 2 of 2004-05.

(3.) Mr. Suneet Goel, learned counsel representing the petitioner, while inviting attention of this Court to Section 12 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, contended that a person having either direct or indirect relationship or interest in any of the parties or in relation to subject matter of dispute, can not be appointed as an arbitrator, as such, appointment of Superintending Engineer 6th Circle, Kullu, as sole arbitrator is not sustainable and an independent arbitrator is required to be appointed. He further contended that Superintending Engineer, 6th Circle, is under direct employment of respondent-Department and as such, his appointment is in violation of the conditions enumerated in 7th Schedule of Arbitration & Conciliation Act as amended upto date. He further contended that apart from above, learned arbitrator has not made any disclosure as required under amended provisions of Arbitration & Conciliation Act disclosing the circumstances, which may lead to justifiable doubts as to the impartiality and neutrality of the arbitrator.