1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Jharkhand Urja Vikas Nigam Limited [JUVNL], earlier known as Jharkhand State Electricity Board[JSEB], through its General Manager having its office at Engineering Building, HEC, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi .... Opposite Parties For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikas Pandey, Advocate Mr. Sanjay Kumar Prasad, Advocate Mr. Piyush Poddar, Advocate Mr.Janak Kumar Mishra, Advocate For Respondent J.U.V.N.L : Mr. Mrinal Kanti Roy, Advocate 12/16th February, 2024 Heard Mr. Vikas Pandey, the learned counsel assisted by Mr. Sanjay Kumar Prasad, Mr. Piyush Poddar and Mr. Janak Kumar Mishra, the learned counsels, appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Mrinal Kanti Roy, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondentJharkhand 2 W.P.(C) No. 3303 of 2018 Urja Vikas Nigam Limited (JUVNL). 2. The prayer in this petition has been made to appoint impartial solearbitrator with regard to 10agreements being no.01 to 10/RE/JSEB/03 04 all dated 16.03.2004 entered between the RITES Limited, a Government of India Undertaking and Jharkhand State Electricity Board [now, Jharkhand Urja Vikas Nigam Limited (JUVNL)]. 3. Mr. Vikas Pandey, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Government of India Undertaking under the Ministry of Railways and a Government Company and all its Directors and most of its shareholders are citizens of India. He further submits that Jharkhand State Electricity Board (JSEB) is a Body constituted under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 and is a Department of Government of Jharkhand, engaged in business of generation and distribution of electricity in the State of Jharkhand. He further submits that Jharkhand State Electricity Board floated tender for electrification of 4923 villages under 5(five) packages by Tender Notice No.123/PR/JSEB/03. He submits that the petitioner was found the lowest bidder and as such on due deliberation and negotiation, the whole work of electrification was awarded to it by 10 work orders mentioned in paragraph no.9 of the writ petition. He submits that after negotiation a draft contract agreement for all packages were prepared, however, when that contract was being examined, it was found that arbitration clause is not there, and therefore, a request was made by the petitioner to include permanent machinery of arbitration for resolution of dispute, and accordingly, the arbitration clause was also inserted in the agreement and finally, the final agreement was entered into between the parties, wherein the arbitration clause was also made. He submits that so far agreement nos.1 to 10 are concerned, all the agreements were on the same and similar terms and conditions. He submits that in course of execution of the contract work some dispute and differences arose between the parties, and accordingly, the RITES 3 W.P.(C) No. 3303 of 2018 Limited and others by letter dated 16.09.2005 invoked the arbitration clause and requested the Secretary, Department of Public Enterprise, Government of India to appoint the Arbitrator for redressal of their genuine grievance. Pursuant to that, Dr. Geeta Rawat was appointed as sole Arbitrator who entered into the Reference and called upon the parties to file their written statement. He submits tha