VEXCEL Computers Pvt. Ltd., through its proprietor Vinod Behl, son of Ram Lal Behl, having its office at 1st Floor, Samridhi Complex, South Office Para, P.O. & P.S.Doranda, Ranchi .... .... .... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI NATH VERMA For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajit Kumar, A.A.G. For the Respondent : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Sr. Advocate Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate 08/28.09.2016 Invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the PetitionerJharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. has prayed to quash the order dated 14.07.2014 passed by Jharkhand Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Facilitation Council (in short „the council‟) in Case No.JHMSEFC 03 of 2012. It appears from the record that in terms of Section 19 of Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') the petitioner has not deposited the statutory amount at the time of filing of this petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the amount was not disclosed/quantified in the impugned judgment, the petitioner could not deposit the statutory amount but the petitioner is still ready to deposit the said amount. Learned senior counsel, Mr. Rajeev Ranjan appearing for the sole respondent submitted that after direction given in the award, the amount has been quantified by a firm of Chartered Accountant and the report has been submitted before the executing court. In the last part of the award, the council under the caption "Decree/Award on 14.07.2014" observed as follows: (i) .......................................................... (ii) .......................................................... (iii) .......................................................... (iv) .......................................................... (v) .......................................................... (vi) The claimant is directed to submit his claim to opposite party duly quantified and certified by practicing firm of Chartered Accountant in respect of principal outstanding inclusive security deposit/performance guarantee/incentive claim and due amount of Service tax alongwith interest @ 3 times of bank rate of the R.B.I. The opposite party is liable to pay the compound interest with monthly rest from the date of amount due for payment to the Applicant till final payment is made under Section 16 of MSMED Act, 2006. (vii) .......................................................... Apparently, the council has not specified the quantum including the interest and other amount in the award rather has directed the claimant to submit his claim to this petitioner duly quantified and certified by practicing firm of Chartered Accountant. Obviously, before this Court the respondent has not submitted any report of the Chartered Accountant showing the total amount which has to be paid by the petitioner in terms of the award. In such a situation, the petitioner is, hereby, directed to deposit 75% of the claim amount of Rs.1,13,29,630/ as mentioned in the claim application before the Registrar General of this Court within two weeks from today, failing which this writ petition shall stand rejected without further reference to a Bench. After deposit of statutory amount, the preliminary question raised by the respondent with regard to maintainability of the writ petition shall be considered. Put up this case on 19th October, 2016. Till next date, operation and implementation of the impugned judgment dated 14.07.2014 passed by Jharkhand Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Facilitation Council in Case No.JHMSEFC 03 of 2012 shall remain stayed. (R