Jammu & Kashmir High Court Srinagar Bench Ut Of Jammu & Kashmir vs M/S Gulati Metals & Alloys on 10 February, 2025 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR Reserved on : 13.03.2024. Pronounced on : 10.02.2025. Case: CM(M) No. 385/2023 1. UT of Jammu & Kashmir through Chief Engineer System & Operation Wing, Kashmir. 2. Executive Engineer TLMDIV, JKPTCL Pampore. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Ab. Rashid Malik, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Mohd Younis Hafiz, Advocate Vs M/s Gulati Metals & Alloys, Lane No. 3, PhaseII SIDCO Industrial Complex, Bari Brahmana, Jammu through its Sole Proprietor Sh. Sandeep Gulati, Aged 55 years, S/o Late Sh. Wazir Chand Gulati, C/o Lane No. 3, PhaseII SIDCO Industrial Complex, Bari Brahmana, Jammu. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Karman Singh Johal, Advocate JUDGMENT 01. This petition filed by reference to article 227 of the Constitution of India by two petitioners finds its nemesis at the very first outing by a very sharp and short submission of Mr. Karman Singh Johal, Advocate for the respondentcaveator submitting that there is no scope for the petitioners to invoke and no maneuverability for this Court to grant indulgence for supervisory jurisdiction under article 227 of the Constitution of India in the 2 CM(M) No. 385/2023 present matter in view of legal position unambiguously settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India which leaves no scope whatsoever for the petitioners to enjoy any foothold to agitate and assail, by a nonstatutory route, an award passed under the Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 ("MSMED Act, 2006" in short). In fact, Mr. Karman Singh Johal, Advocate meets this Court upfront to submit that in view of the judgment in the case of "M/s India Glycols Limited and another Vs Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, Medchal Malkajgiri and others" (2024 AIR SC 285) this Court cannot even venture to scan and survey the factual contents of the case at the asking of the petitioners except by overreaching the mandate of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India's judgment supra and doing an exercise in futility. 02. Through the medium of this petition, the Chief Engineer, System & Operation Wing, Kashmir and the Executive Engineer TLMDIV, JKPTCL Pampore are the ones asking for setting aside of an award dated 30.11.2023 passed by the Micro & Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, (in short "MSEFC"), Jammu in case No. JK/19/S/11117 under section 18 of MSMED Act, 2006. 03. The award in reference bears a direction unto the two petitioners to release an amount to the tune of Rs.10,59,460/ (Rs. 86,973/ as principal amount and Rs.9,72,487/ on account of interest on delayed payments) which is outstanding in respect of P.O.No. CE/PMM/P32/SI/201112/861829 dated 28.12.2011 as 3 CM(M) No. 385/2023 per claim statement upto 31.12.2019 furnished by the MSE duly certified Gupta Gupta & Associates LLP and an amount of Rs. 1,42,94,633/ on account of an interest on delayed payment which is outstanding in respect of P.O.No.CE/PMM/P06/SI/2011 2012/715757 dated 02.12.2011 as per statement upto 31.10.2019 furnished by the MSE duly certified Gupta Gupta Associates LLP. 04. As against the arguments made by Mr. Abdul Rashid Malik, learned Sr. AAG representing the petitioners aiming to hit at the said award from all sides,factual as well as legal, Mr. Karman Singh Johal, Advocate for the respondent draws the attention of this Court towards para 15 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India's judgment in the case of "M/s India Glycols Limited" (supra), wherein it is observed that when the High Court of Telangana had come to hold that a petition under section 227 of the Constitution of India was not maintainable in assailing an award under MSMED Act, 2006, then it was unnecessary for the High Court to have entered upon the merits of the controversy which arose before the Facilitation Council. 05. It is by reference to this paragraph of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, Mr. Karman Singh Johal, Advocate sets up a caveat and constraint for this Court not to undertake an exercise of factual enquiring into the case except at the cost of precious loss of court's time and energy and by missing the mandate of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.