1 S.B. Arbitration Application No.27/2008 M/s. Yaduvanshy Const. Company vs State of Rajasthan & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 7.7.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA. Mr.RS Choudhary, for the applicant. Ms.Aruna Negi, for the respondent. <><><> Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner-contractor in response to the notice inviting tender issued by the respondent submitted his tender and ultimately his offer was accepted and petitioner executed the agreement with the respondent and started working from 29.10.2005 and as per the petitioner he started the work and it is also alleged that during carrying out the work as per Annex.1, the petitioner firm faced objections of the residents of ward no.15 and therefore, he could not complete the work. It is alleged that Asstt. Engineer and Executive Engineer of the Municipal Board, Bhadra directed the petitioner-firm to stop work and, therefore, the work remained closed for 2 months. After some time, instructions were issued by the Executive officer, Municipal Board, Bhadra to the petitioner-firm for starting the work and petitioner-firm started the work. On 2 23.1.2006 against there were some objections raised by some tenants and work was not completed. The petitioner submitted some representations and ultimately, the respondent cancelled the contract of the petitioner on 17th Marcy, 2006 and issued fresh NIT for completion of the rest of the work at the risk and cost of the petitioner-firm. The petitioner-firm filed the suit for injunction for restraining the other party to do the work, however, the petitioner has submitted this petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointing the arbitrator to settle the dispute as the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.56762/- and he also deposited the settlement fees as required by clause 23 of the agreement. Inspite of the petitioner's request, the arbitrator was not appointed, therefore, he has submitted this petition under Section 11 of the Act of 1996 before this Court. The respondent submitted reply and raised objection that clause 23 provides for referring the dispute to the standing committee and according to learned counsel for the respondent there is no provision for referring the matter to the arbitrator and, therefore, the arbitrator cannot be appointed. The objection raised by the respondent has already been answered by the Division Bench of this Court 3 delivered in the case of Chetan Construction Co. Vs. State & Ors reported in 2005(1) WLC (Raj.) 484 wherein the authority failed to refer the matter to the standing committee under the same clause 23 then this Court held that if the party fails to act in accordance with procedure provided in clause 23 of agreement then the Chief Justice or the Judge designated by it is required to appoint arbitrator after taken into consideration the provisions of Section 11 of the Act of 1996. Since there is live dispute and that has not been adjudicated yet and the petitioner before approaching this Court requested the respondents for appointing arbitrator and the respondent failed to appoint the arbitrator, therefore, this petition is allowed and Sh. Sohan Lal Beniwal, Retd. Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department resident of Near Tiddi Area, Patel Nagar, Bikaner is appointed as arbitrator, who may fix his fees and also fix the expenditure which is necessary for conducting arbitral proceedings. (PRAKASH TATIA),J. cpgoyal/-