Patna High Court
Rama Nand Singh vs The Managing Director, Bihar State Food ... on 18 August, 2018
Author: Mukesh R. Shah
Bench: Chief Justice
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Request Case No.147 of 2017
===========================================================
1. Sanjit Kumar Singh, Son of Akhilesh Singh, Proprietor of M/s Maa Tara Rice
Mill, Resident of Village- Kurma, P.S.- Obra, District- Aurangabad.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation Limited through its
Managing Director, Office at Khadya Bhawan, Daroga Prasad Path, R- Block, Road
No.2, Patna- 800001.
2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corpora tion Limited,
Office at Khadya Bhawan, Daroga Prasad Path, R- Block, Road No.2, Patna-
800001.
3. The District Manager, Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation Limited,
Aurangabad.
.... .... Respondent/s
with
===========================================================
Request Case No. 148 of 2017
===========================================================
1. Ram Nath Singh @ Ram Nath Prasad Singh, Son of Late Deonandan Singh, R/o
Vill- Mayabigha, P.S.- Madanpur, District- Aurangabad.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Bihar State Food Civil Supplies Corporation Limited through its M.D., Bihar
at Patna.
2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Food Civil Supplies Corporation Limited,
Bihar at Patna.
3. The District Manager, B.S.F.C., Aurangabad, Dist- Aurangabad.
.... .... Respondent/s
with
===========================================================
Request Case No. 202 of 2017
===========================================================
1. Rama Nand Singh Son of Late Shiv Narayan Singh resident of village Kaithna,
P.S. Itarhi, District Buxar , Proprietor M/S Narayan Jee Mini Rice Plant, Kaithna,
Buxar.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Managing Director, Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Limited,
Khadya Bhawan, Daroga Prasad Path, R - Block - Road No. 2, Patna - 800001.
2. The District Manager, Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Limited,
Buxar.
.... .... Respondent/s
with
Patna High Court REQ. CASE No.147 o f 2017(II)dt.18-08-2018
2/5
===========================================================
Request Case No. 203 of 2017
===========================================================
1. Mohan Chaubey Son of Radhe Krishna Chaubey Resident of Village - Indaur,
P.S. - Itarhi, District - Buxar, Proprietor Buxar of M/S Shankar Rice Plant, Indaur,
Buxar.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Managing Director, Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Limited,
Khadya Bhawan, Daroga Prasad Path, R - Block - Road No. 2, Patna - 800001.
2. The District Manager, Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Limited,
Buxar.
.... .... Respondent/s
with
===========================================================
Request Case No. 204 of 2017
===========================================================
1. Yoogendra Sah Son of Rajgrihi Sah Resident of Village - Khanita, P.S. Itarhi,
District Buxar, Proprietor M/S Pooja Mini Rice Mill, Basaon, Buxar.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Managing Director, Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Limited,
Khadya Bhawan, Daroga Prasad Path, R - Block - Road No. 2, Patna - 800001.
2. The District Manager, Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Limited,
Buxar.
.... .... Respondent/s
with
===========================================================
Request Case No. 205 of 2017
===========================================================
1. Sunil Sah Son of Late Ram Suresh Sah Resident of Village - Indaur, P.S. - Itarhi,
District - Buxar, Proprietor M/S Radhika Enterprises Mini Rice Mill, Itarhi, Buxar.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Managing Director, Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Limited,
Khadya Bhawan, Daroga Prasad Path, R - Block - Road No. 2, Patna - 800001.
2. The District Manager, Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Limited,
Buxar.
.... .... Respondent/s
===========================================================
Patna High Court REQ. CASE No.147 o f 2017(II)dt.18-08-2018
3/5
Appearance :
(In REQ. CASE No.147 of 2017)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
(In REQ. CASE No.148 of 2017)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwary, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. Helal Ahmad, Advocate
(In REQ. CASE No.202 of 2017)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
(In REQ. CASE No.203 of 2017)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
(In REQ. CASE No.204 of 2017)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
(In REQ. CASE No.205 of 2017)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
===========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
ORAL JUDGMENT
II Date: 18-08-2018
1. All these petitions/matters are placed before the Court
today in the light of the certain developments that have taken place
after orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 29.01.2018
in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 450 of 2018.
1.1. All these applications were seeking constitution of an
Arbitral Tribunal in the matter of dispute that has arisen between the
applicants and the respondent-Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies
Corporation in the matter of supply of food grain and other products.
It appears that earlier after hearing detailed argument and various
objections, this Court appointed Arbitrators in more than 200 cases
and the learned Arbitrators were seized of the matter. However, in
the meanwhile, the Corporation approached the Hon'ble Supreme
Court by Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 450 of 2018 and by a
Patna High Court REQ. CASE No.147 o f 2017(II)dt.18-08-2018
4/5
detailed order passed on 29.01.2018, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
though upheld the order passed by this Court in the matter of
constituting an Arbitral Tribunal and referring the matter for
arbitration, but directed that not more than ten cases should be
allotted to a single Arbitrator. As a consequence of the aforesaid
order passed in cases where the arbitrators appointed by this Court on
earlier occasions were allotted more than ten cases, they returned the
files to this Court after retaining ten cases for hearing of the matter.
That is why, now present petitions are placed before this Court for
fresh order for appointment of the Arbitrator.
2. Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respective applicants and the respondent-Corporation and
considering the earlier common order passed by this Court dated
08.09.2017and the order dated 29.01.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and also the subsequent order passed by this Court in Request Case No. 118 of 2017 and other orders, all these applications are allowed. Shri Sahid Rais, District Judge (Retired) is, hereby, appointed as an Arbitrator to deal with the issue in question, subject to the Registry obtaining the appropriate declaration from the sole Arbitrator, as required, under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as amended from time to time, to be obtained this from three weeks from today and such declaration be placed on record in each of the present proceeding. All these applications are Patna High Court REQ. CASE No.147 o f 2017(II)dt.18-08-2018 5/5 ALLOWED, accordingly. Considering the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, dated 29.01.2018 in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 450 of 2018, it is observed that the learned Arbitrator to conclude the arbitration proceeding on day to day basis within a period of three months from the date of the first hearing which shall begin within a period of two weeks from the date of furnishing the declaration as above. It is also made clear that pendency of arbitration proceedings will not affect criminal proceedings, including the investigation. All the arbitration proceedings will be carried out at Patna. All contentions available under the law to the parties before the arbitrator are left open to be gone into by the Arbitrator in accordance with law. All concerned are directed to co- operate the learned Arbitrator in finalizing the decision and disposing of all the arbitration proceedings at the earliest within a period, observed hereinabove. With this observation and direction, all these applications are allowed/disposed of.
(Mukesh R. Shah, CJ) Brajesh/-
AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 23.08.2018 Transmission Date