THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Arbitration Application No.142 of 2010 (Dated : 23-08-2011) Between: Newstoday Private Limited …Applicant A n d Mr.Joy Chatterjee & Ors. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Arbitration Application No.142 of 2010 ORDER: This application has been taken out by Newstoday Private Limited, TV Division, under sub-sections (5) and (6) of Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of arbitrator for resolution of the disputes relatable to Agreement dated 27.9.2007. 2(a). Newstoday Private Limited, Television Division (in short, `the applicant’) is a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at ETV Building, Ramoji Film City, Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy District. The applicant is engaged, inter alia, in the activity of collection and dissemination of news all over the world through Newspapers and Television network. The applicant offered the 1st respondent-Joy Chatterjee the position of Production Associate Grade-III with a probation period of six months. The 1st respondent executed an agreement for due performance and observation of the terms and conditions of the agreement. Pursuant to the agreement, the 1st respondent joined in the organization of the applicant at Ramoji Film City, Hyderabad on 1-10-2007 and he received Letter of Employment-Probationary dated 1-10-2007. The 2nd respondent stood as surety for due performance of the obligations by the 1st respondent under the terms and conditions of the agreement. Since the 1st respondent has not fully acquainted with the functions of production associate, his probation was extended by another three months, vide letter dated 1-3-2008. 2(b) During the extended period of probation, the 1st respondent availed leave from 25-6-2008 to 8-7-2008. On expiry of the said leave, the 1st respondent sought for extension of leave through a fax message dated 8.7.2008. Considering his request, the applicant extended his leave up to 19-7-2008. After expiry of leave, the 1st respondent was supposed to report to duty from 21.7.2008. Instead of reporting to duty, the 1st respondent sent a Fax message dated 22.7.2008 for another extension of leave on the ground of his mother’s ill health. The extension, as sought for, came to be refused by the applicant, vide letter dated 6-8-2008. The 1st respondent sought for his transfer from Hyderabad to Kolkata. The applicant refused his request for transfer from Hyderabad to Kolkata and directed him to report to duty. Despite the specific direction, the 1st respondent failed to report to duty and abstained from duties unauthorisedly from 21-7- 2008. The applicant issued a show-cause notice dated 22-05-2009 directing him to show cause as to why he shall not be discharged from probationary employment for his continuous and unauthorised absence from 21-7-2008. Despite receipt of notice, the 1st respondent has not submitted any explanation. Consequent on the failure of the 1st respondent in submitting the explanation to the show- cause notice, the applicant discharged the 1st respondent from probationary employment, vide letter dated 11.8.2009 without prejudice to their right to recover the compensation of Rs.75,000/- as per the terms and conditions of the Articles of Agreement. The 1st respondent issued explanation to the show-cause notice dated 22.5.2009. According to the applicant, the allegations levelled by the 1st respondent have no substance. 3. Notice to the respondents 1 to 3 came to be ordered on 13.9.2010. The applicant was permitted to take out personal notice to the respondents 1 and 2 by registered post acknowledgment due. Accordingly, the applicant took out notice and filed proof of service. Despite service being effected, the respondents did not choose to enter appearance either in person or through a counsel to resist the application. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant and perused the material brought on record. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the 1st respondent having joined as Probationary Production Associate, Grade-III, discontinued the service by remaining absent and despite letters addressed to him, he did not choose to report to duty. A further submission has been made that there being no response from the respondents, the applicant invoked arbitration clause and proposed the name of Shri K.Prakash, Advocate, Hyderabad as arbitrator and communicated the same to the respondents for their consent. However, the respondents failed to respond. A further submission has been made that the disputes between the parties are required to be settled by a sole arbitrator as per Clause (16) of the Agreement, dated 27-9-2007. The arbitration clause in the agreement reads as hereunder:- “ In the event of any dispute (including any Industrial Dispute) or difference which may arise between the parties or their representatives with regard to the construction, meaning and effect of this deed or any part thereof or their respective rights and liabilities thereunder, the same shall be referred to the sole arbitration of an arbitrator to be nominated and whose award shall be final and binding on the parties. The provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 shall govern the Arbitration Proceedings”. 6. It is a matter of record that the 1st respondent accepted the letter of employment and executed the Agreement dated 27-9-2007. The 1st respondent left the employment while on probation and refused to join duty despite repeated letters addressed to him by the applicant. The disputes between the parties are required to be settled by a sole arbitrator as per Clause (16) of the Agreement, dated 27-9-2007. In that view of the matter, I find that the applicant made out valid ground for appointment of arbitrator for resolution of the disputes between the parties relatable to Agreement dated 27-9-2007. 7. Accordingly, the arbitration application is allowed appointing Sri M.Bhaskar, a retired District Judge R/o H.No.16-2-753/C/1, Plot No.30, Revenue Board Colony, Malakpet, Hyderabad-36] as arbitrator for resolution of the disputes that have arisen between the parties, relating to Agreement dated 27-9-2007. He shall fix his own fee. _____________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Dt.23-08-2011 RAR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Arbitration Application No.142 of 2010 (Dated : 23-08-2011)