IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Arb. Case No.48 of 2010 Date of decision : February 23, 2011 Kalyan Chauhan …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : M/s Kapil Chauhan & Hoshiar Verma, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General. Surjit Singh, J (Oral) Petitioner is an enlisted contractor with the Government of Himachal Pradesh. Himachal Pradesh Government, in IPH Department, awarded work of augmentation of water supply scheme to the petitioner. Agreement was executed. Copy of the agreement is Annexure P-3. Agreement contains an arbitration clause, which is No.25. Per this clause, in case of any dispute, arising between the parties, out of the contract, the same is required to be referred to a sole arbitrator, to be appointed by the Engineer-in-Chief or Chief Engineer, IPH. 2. Petitioner completed the job and submitted bill in 2008. He claimed certain amount of money, in excess of the amount of the work initially entered in the agreement. That money has not been paid. Petitioner approached the Chief Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… Engineer for appointment of Arbitrator, vide notice Annexure P-6, which is dated 24th April, 2010. Arbitrator has not been appointed, so far. 3. Aforesaid facts are not disputed by the respondents. However, it is stated in the reply that 95% of the total value of the work, as entered in the contract, has already been paid to the petitioner and only 5% money remains to be paid. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. 5. Plea raised by the respondents is required to be gone into not by the Court but by the Arbitrator. Admittedly, a dispute has arisen between the parties and as per clause-25 of Agreement Annexure P-3 that is required to be adjudicated by arbitration. Consequently, present petition is allowed and Shri J.S. Bhogal, Senior Advocate is appointed as Arbitrator in the matter. His fee is fixed at `50,000/-, which shall initially be paid by the petitioner and the ultimate liability to pay the same shall be determined by the Arbitrator. In addition to the amount of `50,000/-, the Arbitrator shall also be paid `5,000/- as ministerial expenses. Petition stands disposed of. February 23, 2011(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J