HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SSNGLE BENCH : HON'BLE SHRi S.R. NAYAK, C.J. WRiT PETiTION N0.1761 OF 1. Steei Authority of india Limited through its Chairman, SA!L, Ispat Bhawan, Lodhi Road, New Deihj. 2. Steei Authority of India Limited through fe ^Aanagi^,g Dirsctor, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bhiias, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Vs. 1. 2. M/s. Amar Engineering Works, through - Partner Kedarnath Singhal, aged about 65 years, son of Shri Motiial Singhai, R/o. 165, New Ciyic Centre, Bhiiai, District Durg (CG). Shri B.S. Gupta, Arbftrator "Saubhagya", I- SM. Padmanbhpur, District Durg, (C.G.) 491 001 . WRST PET1TION N0.1762 OF 2006. 1. Steel Authority of Sndia Limited through its Chairman, SAIL, Ispat Bhawan, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. 2. Steel Authority of India Limited through its Managing Director, Bhilai Steei Piant, Bhiiai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) M/s. Amar Engineering Works, through - Partner Kedarnath Singhai, aged about 65 years, son of Shri Motiiai Singha!, R/o. 165, New Civic Centre, Bhiiai, District Durg (CG). 2. Shri B.S. Gupta, Arbitrator "Saubhagya", 1- S.M. Padmanbhpur, Dsstrict Durg, (C.G.) 491 Q01 . WR1T PETmONN0^1783_OF^006, Vs. 1. PETIT10NERS 1. Steel Authority of indsa Lsmitsd Shrough its Chairman, SAIL, Ispat Bhawan, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. 1\ V^- a's';i'''^^'^^'- <»-, <.., 2. Stee! Autl^ority of India Limited through its Managing Director, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bhilai, Disft. Durg (C.G.) Vs. 1. M/s. Amar Engineering Works, through - Partner Kedarnath Singhal, aged about 65 years, son of Shri Motilai SinghaE, R/o. 165, New Civic Centre, Bhilai, District Durg (CG). 2. Shri B.S. Gupta, Arbitrator "Saubhagya", 1- S.M. Padmanbhpur, District Durg, (C.G.) 491 001 . Dr. N.K. Shukla, senior counsei with Shri A.K. Yadav, iearned counsel for the petitioners. Shri Mukesh Sharma, fearned counsei for respondenf No. (Passed on 25th July, 2008) !n al! these writ petitions, the order made by the learned District Judge, Durg appointing the Arbitrator under Section 11 (6) of Arbitration Act has been assaited. In the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in M/s. S.B.P. &Co. vs. M/s. Patei Engineering Ltd. & Anr.1, the iearned District Judge ought to have transferred the application to the Chief Justice of thte Court. In that view of the matter, fhe impugned orders are set aside. (2) The learned District Judge is directed to refer the applications to the Chief Justice of this Court. ChiefJustice n 1. 2006(1) MPJR 1 = (2005) 8 SCC 638