Micro & Small Enterprises Facilitation Council of Haryana and others . . . . . Respondents ***** ***** Present: Mr.Abir Phukan, Advocate, for Mr.Kanwardeep Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Ashish Chopra, Advocate, for the respondents. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. The prayers made in this petition are for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the notice dated 13.3.2018 and the order dated 7.6.2018 of the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council of Haryana/respondent No.1 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Council] and the notice dated 24.7.2018 issued by the Arbitrator (Respondent No.3) appointed by the Council. In brief, the petitioner is a limited company engaged in the business of real estate whereas respondent No.2 is a real estate broker based in Gurugram. The petitioner and respondent No.2 entered into an agreement called "Channel Partner Agreement" on 23.7.2014 for a period of 8 months as per which respondent No.2 was entitled to a brokerage for arranging and negotiating the sale of flats in the projects of the petitioner in Bengaluru. The said agreement was terminated on 11.12.2014. Respondents No.2 sent a 1 of 33 ::: Downloaded on 07102018 11:09:35 ::: CWP No.21088 of 2018 2 letter dated 3.01.2015 asking the petitioner to pay `12,74,847/ towards brokerage and `6,00,00,000/ towards damages. Respondent No.2 applied for registration on 17.3.2016 as a micro enterprise under Section 8 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'] and was accordingly registered. Respondent No.2 filed a petition under Section 433(2) & (f) of the Companies Act, 1956 [for short 'the Act'] before the National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru [for short 'the NCLT'] in September, 2017 against the petitioner for winding up, which is pending. Respondent No.2 also raised a claim with registration No.SEBIP/MH17/0005372/1 on 28.12.2017 with the Securities and Exchange Board of India [SEBI] against the petitionercompany which has been dismissed. Respondent No.2 filed a petition bearing Claim Application No.460 of 2018 under the Act before respondent No.1 in which impugned notice was issued on 13.3.2018 to the petitioner to which reply was filed on 2.4.2018 but on 06.06.2018, respondent No.1 passed the impugned order and referred the claim of respondent No.2 to respondent No.3, empanelled Arbitrator notified by the Government. The petitioner received a notice dated 24.7.2018 for appearance before respondent No.3 on 7.8.2018. This petition is filed on 13.8.2018 to challenge the impugned notice dated 13.3.2018 and order dated 7.6.2018 issued/passed by respondent No.1 and notice dated 24.7.2018 issued by respondent No.3, inter alia, on the ground that respondent No.2 was got registered vide registration certificate on 17.3.2016 as a micro enterprise and as such the benefits of the provisions of the Act cannot be availed by respondent No.2 for the services rendered prior to its registration under the Act, respondent No.1 was not entitled to proceed in terms of the provisions of Section 18(3) of the Act in view of the Arbitration clause in the agreement, the claim is otherwise time 2 of 33 ::: Downloaded on 07102018 11:09:36 ::: CWP No.21088 of 2018 3 barred because the agreement was terminated on 11.12.