IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Arb. Case No.14 of 2011 Date of decision : May 20, 2011 Satya Dev Sharma …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and another …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. T.S. Bhogal, Advocate. For the Respondents : M/s Ramesh Thakur & R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate Generals. Surjit Singh, J (Oral) Heard and gone through the record. 2. As per Arbitration Clause No.25, in the Agreement, Annexure C-1, authority competent to nominate Arbitrator is Engineer-in-Chief/Chief Engineer of H.P.P.W.D. In the present case, the petitioner, instead of approaching Engineer-in-Chief/Chief Engineer of H.P.P.W.D., approached the Chief Engineer, National Highway, vide Annexure C-2, for appointment of Arbitrator. Since the authorities named in the Arbitration Clause have not been approached, for appointing the Arbitrator, present petition is not competent. The same is, therefore, dismissed. May 20, 2011(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?